Times of India
Sept 28 2019
TNN | Sep 28, 2019, 11.29 AM IST
MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Friday dismissed a 71-year-old Armenian woman's petition to quash the Foreigner Regional Registration Office (FRRO) notice asking her to leave the country for breaching visa condition and overstaying.
Ruzanna Petrosyan had challenged the August 8 notice to leave India within seven days or face forcible deportation. The notice stated that she had entered India on October 31, 2010, on a multiple entry visa, which was extended till January 15, 2018.
Petrosyan's petition said she and her daughter, Susanna, first came to India on a tourist visa in 2004. They returned to India in February 2006. Her daughter married an Indian in 2007, but they divorced in 2016. Later she remarried. Petrosyan's petition stated that she and Susanna applied for visa extension, but the FRRO "delayed granting it and gave false assurances".
A bench of Justices Satyaranjan Dharmadhikari and Gautam Patel questioned how Petrosyan stayed in India after her visa expired, "What authority you, as a non-citizen, have after expiry of visa?" asked Justice Patel. Yadav said Petrosyan's application for visa extension was pending consideration. He also pointed out that she is a single mother who is dependent on her daughter.
Centre's advocate Parag Vyas informed the court that in October 2018, the ministry of home affairs had refused Petrosyan visa extension. "She will have to go back to Armenia and come back here on a new visa," he said, adding that Susanna's application too is pending. Vyas said since Petrosyan had changed her address, the FRRO could contact her only in May 2019, and give her the notice. The judges noted that Petrosyan changed her address six times, there was nothing on record to prove she had informed the FRRO about this and how she continued to reside in the city.
Centre's advocate Parag Vyas informed the court that in October 2018, the ministry of home affairs had refused Petrosyan visa extension. "She will have to go back to Armenia and come back here on a new visa," he said, adding that Susanna's application too is pending. Vyas said since Petrosyan had changed her address, the FRRO could contact her only in May 2019, and give her the notice. The judges noted that Petrosyan changed her address six times, there was nothing on record to prove she had informed the FRRO about this and how she continued to reside in the city.
Declining to interfere, the judges, in their order, said: "To our mind, neither there is illegality or perversity in the impugned notice." They declined to stay their order saying it will make a mockery of the Foreigners Act.