Marriage to an Indian citizen does not give a foreign national an enforceable right to enter India or even to have a visa application considered, the Kerala High Court has held, turning down a Pakistani woman’s plea to be allowed to apply for a visa to attend her brother-in-law’s wedding in Kerala.
Kochi: The Kerala High Court has dismissed a writ petition by an Indian citizen and his Pakistani wife seeking directions to allow her to apply for, and have processed, an Indian visa, holding that as long as the Centre’s April 2025 order suspending visa services to Pakistani nationals remains in force, no such right can be claimed [Unaiz Kadumbottil and Another v. Union of India and Others].
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas answered in the negative the two questions the Court framed: whether a foreign national can demand an opportunity to apply for an Indian visa, and whether a spouse of an Indian citizen stands on a better footing.
Background of the case
The petitioners, a man from Wayanad and his wife, a Pakistani national, registered their marriage in Dubai on June 1, 2025 and live abroad. They wished to attend the first petitioner’s brother’s wedding on August 15, 2026. When the wife tried to apply for an Indian visa, she found no procedure available even to submit an application, whether for a visit visa or any other category, on the prescribed electronic platform. An email from the authorities confirmed that no provision existed to apply, and the couple approached the High Court.
What the parties argued
Counsel for the petitioners argued that the wife had done no harm to the country and that denying her even an opportunity to apply violated Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. It was further urged that, being married to an Indian citizen, she would ultimately need a long-term visa and ought at least to be considered for one.
The Union, through the Ministry of Home Affairs, stated that no foreign national can claim entry into India as of right and that regulating immigration is within the Centre’s discretion. It relied on an order dated April 25, 2025 issued under Section 3 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, which revoked all visas issued to Pakistani nationals with effect from April 27, 2025, except medical, long-term, diplomatic and official visas, and suspended visa services for them. Central Government Counsel added that fresh long-term visas were also not open for consideration, and that only long-term and medical visas issued before April 25, 2025 were permitted to continue.
Entry of foreigners a sovereign function
The Court held that regulating the entry, stay and departure of foreigners is an exclusive sovereign function of the Union, flowing from its duty to protect the country’s sovereignty, security and public order. Noting that the April 2025 order was issued after the attack at Pahalgam on April 22, 2025 and continues to be in force, and that the Foreigners Act has since been replaced by the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025, the Court observed:
“No foreign national, even if he/she is the spouse of an Indian citizen, has a vested right to demand that he/she should be permitted to enter the country.”
It added:
“As long as the order issued under Section 3 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 remains in force, no Pakistani National can demand that his/her application for Visa be processed.”
The Court referred to the Delhi High Court’s ruling in Sheena Naz v. Union of India, which held that the Section 3(1) order was driven by serious national security considerations, did not warrant judicial review, and that courts could not carve out exceptions to it. It also noted that the visa sought here could only be a visit visa, as the stated purpose was to attend a wedding.
Articles 21 and 14
On Article 21, the Court held that the order, having been issued under Section 3 of the Foreigners Act, is a procedure established by law. On Article 14, it held that while the provision extends to non-citizens, it can be claimed only by those within the territory of India, and the second petitioner was not in the country. It relied on the Delhi High Court’s decision in Tanveer Wasim Safdar @ Tan France v. Union of India, which described an Article 14 challenge over delayed visa processing by a person outside India as fundamentally misconceived. The writ petition was accordingly dismissed.
Case Title: Unaiz Kadumbottil and Another v. Union of India and Others
Case Number: W.P.(C) No. 22580 of 2026
Neutral Citation: 2026:KER:63060
Bench: Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, Kerala High Court
Date of Judgment: August 13, 2026
Appearance: Amal Dev D.S. for the petitioners; Harikrishnan P.B., Central Government Counsel, for the respondents