The Keralam High Court has ruled that marriage to an Indian citizen does not create an automatic or legally enforceable right for a foreign national to obtain an Indian visa. The court upheld the Centre’s authority to regulate the entry and stay of foreign nationals, citing national security, sovereignty and public order.
The case involved an Indian man and his Pakistani wife, who had married in Dubai and sought a visa for her to travel to Keralam for a family wedding. The petition was dismissed by Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas.
Couple challenged suspension of visa processing
The legal dispute arose after the couple attempted to obtain a visit visa for the Pakistani wife to attend her brother-in-law’s wedding in Keralam.
However, when they tried to submit a visa application through the designated electronic portal, they found that there was no functional mechanism available for Pakistani passport holders to apply.
The couple approached the Keralam High Court, arguing that the absence of a mechanism even to submit a visa application violated their constitutional rights. They also contended that being the foreign spouse of an Indian citizen should make the woman eligible for consideration under long-term visa provisions.
Centre cites security concerns after Pahalgam attack
The Union government opposed the plea, pointing to the suspension of visa services for Pakistani nationals following security concerns after the April 2025 Pahalgam terror attack.
The Centre told the court that under Section 3 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, read with the applicable immigration framework, regular visa processing for Pakistani citizens had been suspended through executive orders.
According to the government, exceptions were limited to certain pre-existing long-term and medical visas issued before the suspension.
The Centre argued that as long as the suspension remained in force, a Pakistani national could not claim a right to have a visa application received, processed or granted.
Marriage does not create an automatic right of entry
The High Court rejected the central argument that marriage to an Indian citizen itself creates a right to enter India.
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas held that a foreign national has no vested or inherent right to obtain an Indian visa merely because they are married to an Indian citizen.
The court emphasised that regulating the entry and stay of foreign nationals falls within the sovereign authority of the Union government.
Article 14 and Article 21 argument also rejected
The petitioners had also relied on Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, arguing that the denial of access to the visa process affected their fundamental rights.
The High Court examined the territorial scope of these constitutional protections in the context of the case.
While non-citizens can invoke constitutional protections when they are within India’s jurisdiction, the court held that a foreign national residing outside India cannot claim an absolute constitutional right to enter the country or compel the government to process an immigration application.
The writ petition was consequently dismissed.
Security policy takes precedence over individual entry request
The ruling places the individual request within the broader framework of India’s immigration and national-security policy.
The Centre’s position was that the existing suspension of visa services for Pakistani nationals remained operative and could not be overridden merely because the applicant was married to an Indian citizen.
The judgment therefore reinforces the distinction between family or marital relationships with Indian citizens and a legally enforceable right of entry into India.
