$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 17th August, 2026 # CNR No. DLHC011065542025 + CONT.CAS(C) 2005/2025 & CM APPL. 82688/2025 PALASH KUMAR DUTTA, THROUGH SPA PRASHANT WADHWA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Zahid Hanief and Ms. Disha Chauhan, Advs. Mob: 7210525656 Email: zahidhaniefadv@gmail.com versus R. D. MEEENA AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr Jivesh Kumar Tiwari, CGSC with Ms. Samiksha and Ms. Nandini Aggarwal, Advs. Mob: 9811612855 Email: jusassociates201@gmail.com CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA MINI PUSHKARNA, J (ORAL): 1. The present petition has been filed alleging wilful disobedience of the order dated 13th October, 2023, passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 7373/2023, wherein, it had been directed as follows: “1. The Petitioner has approached this Court for a direction to the Respondent to permit the Petitioner to visit India and to remove the name of the Petitioner from the blacklist category restraining the Petitioner from entering the country. Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Date:23.08.2026 10:20:14 Signature Not Verified 2. Notice was issued on 26.05.2023. Counter affidavit has been filed by the Respondent/Union of India. 3. In the counter affidavit, it has been stated that the Petitioner has been blacklisted as a blacklist Grade-A and the order of blacklisting has been issued at the behest of the security agency. It is further stated that the Petitioner is blacklisted as he entered twice on two different identities and on the basis of fictitious address which could not be traced. 4. Mr. Manish Mohan, learned CGSC, very fairly points out the a Review Committee has been constituted by the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Petitioner can approach the Review Committee giving his reasons as to why the Petitioner should not be blacklisted and this Court should relegate the Petitioner to avail the said remedy available to him instead of entertaining the instant writ petition. 5. The suggestion given by Mr. Manish Mohan, learned CGSC, is reasonable one. Resultantly, the Petitioner is directed to approach the Review Committee constituted by the Ministry of Home Affairs to consider his case. 6. The Respondents are directed to provide the Petitioner with the two addresses which have been furnished by the Petitioner in his Visa applications which is the basis for blacklisting the Petitioner. Let the addresses be furnished within a period of 10 days from today. 7. The Petitioner is permitted to file a representation before the Review Committee within two weeks thereafter. The Review Committee is requested to consider the petition of the Petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from today. 8. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. 9. The writ petition is disposed of along with pending application(s), if any.” 2. Perusal of the aforesaid order shows that the application of the petitioner for Visa to visit India was not allowed on the basis that he had been blacklisted at behest of the security agency. Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Date:23.08.2026 10:20:14 Signature Not Verified 3. Accordingly, by way of the aforesaid order, the petitioner was permitted to file a representation before the Review Committee, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India and the Review Committee was directed to consider the said representation of the petitioner expeditiously. 4. Today, a Compliance Affidavit dated 14th August, 2026, has been handed over to this Court by the learned counsel for the respondents, which is taken on record. 5. The relevant paragraphs of the said Compliance Affidavit, read as under: “xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx” 6. Perusal of the aforesaid shows that the petitioner herein has been permitted to visit India, and his name has been removed from the blacklist Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Date:23.08.2026 10:20:14 Signature Not Verified category. 7. However, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in the said Compliance Affidavit, the petitioner has been referred as a Bangladeshi National. 8. He draws the attention of this Court to the representation of the petitioner dated 02nd November, 2023, submitted to the Review Committee, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, wherein, it has been stated as follows: “xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx” 9. By referring to the aforesaid, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has a dual citizenship of Bangladesh and Australia. 10. He, thus, submits that no impediment may be put on the Visa application of the petitioner on this ground. 11. In response, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that copies of both the passports of the petitioner, viz. issued by Bangladesh and Australia, are before the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. 12. He submits that as and when the petitioner applies for a Visa to visit India, requisite orders shall be passed. 13. The aforesaid statement is taken note of. 14. No further orders are required to be passed in the present petition. By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Date:23.08.2026 10:20:14 15. Accordingly, the present petition, along with pending application is disposed of. MINI PUSHKARNA, J AUGUST 17, 2026/SK By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Date:23.08.2026 10:20:14