J.N.Takru, J. - (1.) These three appeals by the State are directed against an appellate order of the learned Sessions Judge of Allahabad and two appellate orders of the learned Civil and Sessions Judge of Rampur acquitting Mukhtar Ahmad in the first appeal and Guchhan and Ibban Khan in the second and third appeals respectively under Section 14 of the Foreigners' Act, 1946 - hereinafter called the Act of 1946 - for the contravention of para 7 of the Foreigners' Order of 1948 - hereinafter called the Order of 1948, As all these appeals raise the same question of law, it will be convenient to dispose of them by a single judgment. The facts, strictly relevant for the decision of these appeals, are not in dispute and, stated briefly, are as follows:
(2.) Mukhtar Ahmad, the respondent in G. A; No. 2216 of 1959, was formerly a citizen of India. In 1948 he went away to Pakistan. After residing there for a Few years lie applied for, and was grant-ed, a Passport by the Pakistan Government on the 2nd of December, 1954. Thereafter on the 22nd December, 1954 he obtained an Indian Visa which was valid for a period of three months to begin with. He entered the territories of India on the 4th of January 1955 and arrived in Allahabad three days later. Subsequently he obtained an extension of his Visa till the 20th of December, 1955. He however did not leave India by the 20th December, 1955, Thereafter on the 15th of August, 1957 he was served with a notice requiring him to leave this country within a month. He however did not comply with that notice either, with the result that he was prosecuted under Section 14 of the Act of 1946 for the contravention of para 7 of the Order of 1948.
(3.) Ibban Khan, the respondent in G.A. No. 2472 of 1959 entered the territories of India on the 11th of March, 1955 on the basis of a Pakistan Passport dated the 3rd of January, 1953 and an Indian Visa dated the 10th of March 1955 which was valid up to the 9th of June 1955. He however did not leave India before the expiry of the said period, with the result that he was prosecuted under Section 14 of the Act of 1946 for the contravention of para 7 of the Order of 1948.;