In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has set aside the Indian government’s decision to cancel the Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) card of Khalid Jahangir Qazi, an 80-year-old US-based professor, due to alleged “anti-India activities.” The court criticized the Centre for its lack of specific details or evidence supporting the allegations, stating that it deprived Qazi of a fair chance to defend himself, a fundamental aspect of procedural fairness and natural justice.
Justice Sanjeev Narula, who issued the verdict on November 12, mandated that the government provide a fresh notice to Qazi, outlining clear grounds for any intended restrictions or cancellations and giving him a reasonable opportunity to respond. The court stressed that this process should be completed within six weeks.
Qazi, a Clinical Professor of Medicine at the Jacob School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences at University at Buffalo, moved to the US in the 1970s and has since lived there with his family. He approached the court after his OCI card was cancelled and he was blacklisted from entering India under the Citizenship Act and the Foreigners Act, respectively.
The government defended its decision by arguing that Qazi had engaged in activities detrimental to India’s sovereignty and integrity, based on intelligence inputs and reports from security agencies. However, these activities were classified as “secret for the security of India” and were not disclosed to Qazi, a point the Centre’s counsel emphasized as necessary for national security.
The court, however, found that the notice of cancellation was vague and lacked specific evidence, contravening procedural safeguards necessary under the Citizenship Act. “Such broad allegations lack the specificity necessary to afford the petitioner an adequate opportunity to be heard,” the verdict read.
The ruling emphasized that denying Qazi his long-term visa rights under the OCI scheme without due process would nullify the benefits intended for OCI cardholders, undermining the purpose of the status provided under the Citizenship Act.
While the court’s decision technically allows Qazi to re-enter India, it also acknowledged the significant underlying concerns related to national security and public interest. It reminded that the authority to grant or deny entry into the country remains a sovereign function of the state, urging the authorities to take a fresh decision in light of the legislative intent behind the protections afforded to OCI cardholders and the findings of the court.
