The Karnataka High Court has refused to direct the immediate release of a Pakistani national who sought freedom from a foreigners’ detention centre despite having been acquitted in criminal cases. The Court held that his detention could not be examined independently of the movement restriction order issued under the Foreigners Act, 1946. The Bench clarified that the petitioner must challenge that order through appropriate legal proceedings before seeking relief against the restriction.
Background
The petitioner, Mohammed Fahad HI alias Mohammed Koya, stated that he had previously approached the High Court through a habeas corpus petition in 2024, which was disposed of on June 16, 2025. However, he had neither been released nor deported to Pakistan.
His counsel further submitted that the petitioner had been acquitted in Criminal Appeal No. 1220/2023 on September 25, 2024, and that the State's appeal against another acquittal had also been dismissed on April 8, 2026.
On this basis, he sought release and an exit pass to leave India.
The State opposed the plea, informing the Court that an order restricting the petitioner's movement had been issued under the Foreigners Act and duly served on him.
The Bench noted that acquittal in criminal proceedings did not, by itself, remove the separate legal restriction imposed on his movement. It also took note of the admitted position that the petitioner did not possess a valid visa to remain in India.
The Court observed:
“Though the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it was only on account of the pendency of the criminal cases that he had been detained at the detention centre, we are of the opinion that in view of the order of restriction of movement passed under the provisions of the Foreigners Act, the petitioner who is a foreign national cannot seek a direction to be set at liberty in view of the admitted position that he has no valid visa to continue his stay in India legally.”
The Bench further clarified that the petitioner must challenge the existing restriction order through the appropriate legal proceedings, rather than seek release through the present habeas corpus petition.
It stated:
“Since an order of restriction of movement is passed against the petitioner, rightly or wrongly, we are of the opinion that he has to challenge the same in appropriate proceedings.”
The High Court disposed of the habeas corpus petition, granting the petitioner liberty to challenge the movement restriction order passed against him under Section 3(2)(e) of the Foreigners Act, 1946.
The Court did not grant his request for immediate release or issue an exit pass to facilitate his departure to Pakistan.
Case Details
Case Title: Mohammed Fahad HI @ Mohammed Koya v. State of Karnataka & Others
Case Number: Writ Petition (Habeas Corpus) No. 84 of 2026
Judges: Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice K.S. Bharath Kumar
Decision Date: October 29, 2026
