According to the petition, Ruqaiya Obaeed<\/strong> married Ubada Abdul Barakat Farooqi<\/strong> in November 2024<\/strong> in Pakistan. After the marriage, she applied for an Indian visa and came to Delhi in April 2025<\/strong> to live with her husband. The Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO)<\/strong> of the Delhi Police<\/strong> then issued her a residential permit<\/strong>. Later, she also applied online for a Long-Term Visa (LTV)<\/strong> and submitted all the required documents.<\/p>\n\n\n However, before her visa application could be processed, a terror attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, on April 22, 2025<\/strong>, led the Union Home Ministry<\/strong> to suspend all visa services for Pakistani nationals. After this sudden suspension, Obaeed approached the FRRO<\/strong> and requested more time to regularise her stay in India. But her request was turned down. Soon after, the FRRO<\/strong> issued her an Exit Permit on April 28<\/strong>, instructing her to leave India by May 19, 2025<\/strong>, through the Attari\u2013Wagah border<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The petition mentioned a report aired by News18<\/strong>, which said that the government had issued an advisory allowing Pakistani nationals with pending LTV applications<\/strong> to either stay in India or apply again. The petition argued that the officials failed to consider this update.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The plea stated:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIt is submitted that on the basis of the aforementioned news, many of the Pakistani national women who had maintained their families, after a matrimonial knot in India, chose to disregard the order of the respondents and they managed to stay on their respective locations.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n The petition further said that in Rajasthan<\/strong>, especially in Jodhpur<\/strong>, local authorities had allowed other Pakistani women married to Indian men<\/strong> to continue living in India.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It added:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe petitioners are similarly situated and they seek parity in treatment.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Ruqaiya Obaeed has asked the court to direct the government to issue her a fresh visit visa or Long-Term Visa<\/strong>, or to allow the Indian High Commission in Islamabad<\/strong> to accept her manual visa application<\/strong>, since online applications are still suspended.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The case was argued by Senior Advocate Sanjeev Sagar<\/strong>, along with Advocates Rajeshwar Singh and Chaitanya Singh<\/strong>, who appeared for the petitioner.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The next hearing will be held on November 12, 2025<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Case Summary<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"Delhi](\"https:\/\/www.shoneekapoor.com\/legal-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/WhatsApp-Image-2025-10-06-at-15.46.01_561ad081-1024x576.jpg\" "\\"\\"")
<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
Explanatory Table of All Laws, Sections & Legal Context Related to the Case<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Relevant Law \/ Policy<\/strong><\/td> Description \/ Provision<\/strong><\/strong><\/td> Relevance in This Case<\/strong><\/td><\/tr> The Foreigners Act, 1946<\/strong><\/td> Empowers the Central Government to regulate the entry, stay, and exit of foreigners in India. Includes power to issue or revoke visas and residence permits.<\/td> The FRRO and MHA actions\u2014suspending visas, issuing residential and exit permits\u2014are taken under this Act.<\/td><\/tr> The Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920<\/strong><\/td> Requires all foreigners entering India to have valid passports and visas. Violations can lead to deportation.<\/td> Used to justify the government\u2019s authority to direct Ruqaiya Obaeed to exit India after visa suspension.<\/td><\/tr> Visa Manual 2023 (Ministry of Home Affairs Guidelines)<\/strong><\/td> Provides the procedure for issuing different types of visas, including Long-Term Visas (LTVs) for Pakistani nationals married to Indian citizens.<\/td> Obaeed\u2019s application for an LTV falls under these guidelines. Her plea argues for equal treatment based on these norms.<\/td><\/tr> Long-Term Visa (LTV) Scheme<\/strong><\/td> A facility extended by India to Pakistani nationals married to Indian citizens, allowing stay up to 5 years, renewable periodically.<\/td> The core of Obaeed\u2019s plea \u2014 she seeks re-issuance or continuation of her LTV under this scheme.<\/td><\/tr> Home Ministry Advisory (April 2025, post-Pahalgam attack)<\/strong><\/td> Suspension of visa services for Pakistani nationals due to security reasons.<\/td> This advisory caused her visa processing to halt and led to the exit order.<\/td><\/tr> Article 14 of the Indian Constitution<\/strong><\/td> Guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of laws.<\/td> The plea cites parity with similarly placed Pakistani women in Rajasthan who were allowed to stay.<\/td><\/tr> Article 21 of the Indian Constitution<\/a><\/strong><\/td> Ensures the right to life and personal liberty, which includes the right to cohabit with a spouse.<\/td> Implied argument that forcing Obaeed to leave violates her fundamental right to live with her husband.<\/td><\/tr> Case Precedents (Analogous cases from Rajasthan, Jodhpur)<\/strong><\/td> In previous cases, Pakistani wives of Indian men were allowed to stay pending visa approval.<\/td> The petitioner seeks \u201cparity in treatment\u201d based on these examples.<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n \n