The High Court of Madhya Pradesh has quashed a criminal case against a Umaria resident who was booked for allegedly failing to report the stay of a foreign national at his home. The court made it clear that authorities cannot prosecute citizens under a law that no longer exists.
The order was passed by Justice Himanshu Joshi while hearing a writ petition filed by Mukhtiyar Ahmed Khan.
Read also:- Humiliation Is Not Justice: Allahabad High Court Strikes Down Placard Punishment for Student
Background of the Case
The case stemmed from a family visit. An American citizen, Mohammad Saheb Khan, had come to India in September 2025 to attend his nephew’s wedding. After staying at a registered hotel in Jabalpur, he visited his relatives in Ward No. 15 of Village Chandia, Umaria district, on November 12, 2025.
Police later registered an FIR against the house owner, Mukhtiyar Ahmed Khan, alleging that he failed to submit Form-C, a mandatory intimation regarding the stay of foreign nationals. The FIR was lodged under Sections 7 and 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, treating the delay as a criminal offence.
Arguments Before the Court
Counsel for the petitioner argued that Khan was not running a hotel, lodge, or guest house. He was a private individual hosting a close relative for a short family visit. It was also pointed out that the local police had already been informed and that Form-C was eventually submitted during the visitor’s stay.
A key legal issue was raised: by September 1, 2025, the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025 had already come into force, repealing the Foreigners Act of 1946. Therefore, the FIR itself was registered under a law that was no longer valid.
On the other hand, the government lawyers maintained that the duty to submit Form-C applied to anyone allowing a foreigner to stay on their premises. They argued that the repeal clause protected such prosecutions and that intention or family relationship did not matter once a violation was established.
Court’s Observations
The court carefully examined the repeal of the old law and the scope of the new legislation. It noted that once the Foreigners Act, 1946 was repealed, all obligations and penalties had to flow only from the 2025 Act and its newly framed rules.
“The alleged omission occurred after the repeal of the 1946 Act,” the bench observed, adding that criminal prosecution under a repealed statute is legally unsustainable unless clearly saved by law.
Justice Joshi underlined a basic principle of criminal law: no person can be prosecuted under a statute that was not in force on the date of the alleged offence.
The court also rejected the government’s reliance on the saving clause, clarifying that such clauses only protect actions already taken when the old law was active. They do not revive repealed laws for new prosecutions.
Final Decision
Finding the very foundation of the FIR to be invalid, the High Court allowed the writ petition.
“The registration of offence under the Foreigners Act, 1946 for an alleged violation occurring on 12.11.2025 is ex facie illegal,” the court held.
Accordingly, the FIR registered at Police Station Chandiya in Crime No. 311/2025, along with all consequential proceedings, was quashed. The court, however, clarified that authorities are free to take action under the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025, if permitted by law.
Case Title: Mukhtiyar Ahmed Khan vs Union of India & Others
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 48763 of 2025
Decision Date: 28 January 2026
