Saving Clause Under Immigration And Foreigners Act, 2025 Does Not Authorise Fresh Proceedings For Omissions After It's Repeal: MP High Court
Isabella Mariam
The High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Single Bench of Justice Himanshu Joshi, quashed an FIR registered against a homeowner for allegedly failing to submit Form-C within the prescribed period upon hosting a foreign national at his private residence for a family visit. The Court held that since the alleged omission occurred after the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025 came into force, initiating fresh criminal proceedings under the repealed Foreigners Act, 1946 was legally impermissible. The saving clause under the new legislation, the Court clarified, does not authorise prosecution for acts or omissions arising post-repeal.
The petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the registration of an offence vide FIR dated 15.11.2025 at Police Station Chandiya, District Umaria, for alleged violation of Sections 7/14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946. The allegation was that the petitioner, being the owner of a residential house, failed to furnish Form-C within the prescribed period in respect of a foreign national who stayed at his premises from 12.11.2025.
The petitioner contended that he had informed the local police about the arrival of the foreign national, who was a relative visiting for a marriage, and that he was not running any commercial accommodation. It was further argued that the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025 had repealed the 1946 Act with effect from 01.09.2025, and therefore initiation of proceedings under the repealed statute was without jurisdiction. The respondents contended that Rule 14 of the Registration of Foreigners Rules, 1992 mandated filing of Form-C within 24 hours and that the saving clause under the 2025 Act validated the action.
The Court framed the issue “as to whether, in the facts of the present case, criminal liability under Sections 7/14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 can be fastened upon the petitioner for alleged delayed submission of Form-C.”
Upon examining the statutory scheme, the Court observed that “Section 7 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 creates obligations in respect of foreigners, while Section 14 prescribes penalty for contravention of the Act or any order made thereunder.” It further recorded that “the duty to submit Form-C arises from Rule 14 of the Registration of Foreigners Rules, 1992, which casts such obligation upon the ‘keeper of the premises’ where the foreigner is accommodated.”
The Court noted that “It is not in dispute that the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025 came into force with effect from 01.09.2025,” and that the enactment “by express legislative mandate repeals the Foreigners Act, 1946.” It stated that upon repeal, “the earlier statutory regime stood effaced except to the extent expressly saved by the repealing enactment.”
Referring to subordinate legislation, the Court observed that “subordinate legislation does not survive the repeal of the parent statute unless expressly saved or re-enacted.” It further recorded that “in the absence of any express saving clause continuing the Registration of Foreigners Rules, 1992, the said Rules ceased to have operative force upon the repeal of the parent Act.” Consequently, it stated that “any obligation, liability or penal consequence must necessarily be traced to the provisions of the 2025 Act and the Immigration and Foreigners Rules, 2025 alone.”
On the principle of criminal liability, the Court observed that “no person can be prosecuted for an offence under a statute which was not in force on the date of the alleged act or omission.” It recorded that “Registration of an offence under a repealed law, in the absence of a saving clause expressly permitting such prosecution, is legally unsustainable.”
While examining the saving clause, the Court stated that “The saving clause does not operate to revive the repealed Foreigners Act, 1946, nor does it authorise initiation of fresh proceedings or registration of offences thereunder in respect of acts or omissions occurring after the enforcement of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025.”
The Court held that “registration of offence under the Foreigners Act, 1946 for an alleged violation occurring on 12.11.2025 is ex facie illegal and without authority of law. The writ petition is allowed. The FIR registered vide Crime No. 311/2025 at Police Station Chandiya, District - Umaria for the offence punishable under Sections 7/14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, against the petitioner is hereby quashed. All consequential proceedings arising therefrom shall also stand quashed. This order shall not preclude the competent authority from taking action, if any is permissible in law, strictly in accordance with the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025.”
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioners: Shri Ahadulla Usmani, Advocate
For the Respondents: Ms. Priti Singh, Advocate for Respondent No.1; Shri B.K. Upadhyay, Government Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 to 5
Case Title: Mukhtiyar Ahmed Khan v. Union of India and Others
Neutral Citation: 2026: MPHC-JBP:8894
Case Number: Writ Petition No. 48763 of 2025
Bench: Justice Himanshu Joshi
