Certo Is this judgment real?
Beta, Supreme Court only. We check Supreme Court of India judgments only for now: a High Court citation reads "Not in our corpus", which never means it does not exist.

Supreme Court of India

JAFARIA versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Decided
22 March 2010
Judges listed
P. SATHASIVAM, H.L. DATTU (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Disposed off

Citations

Official
[2010] 3 S.C.R. 714 · 2010 INSC 162

Cited by

We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.

Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.

The Court's text

Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.

1

According to the petitioner, he is a permanent resident of Chorewala, District Rahimiarkhan, Pakistan and has been illegally detained for the last three and a half years in Central Jail, Jaipur though he has undergone actual sentence of nine years awarded by Sessions Court in Sessions Case No. 228 of 1997 by judgement dated 16.01.2006. The present confinement, according to him, is contrary to Article 21 of the Co~stitution of India. In the writ petition he has also highlighted various details and finally prayed for issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus to release him from Central Jail, Jaipur forthwith.

pp. 714–715, margin F

2

Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, State of Rajasthan has filed a counter affidavit stating that they have no objection in releasing the petitioner from Central Jail, Jaipur.

p. 715, margin A

3

On behalf of the Government of India, Deputy Secretary (Foreigners) in the Ministry of Home Affairs, filed an affidavit highlighting its stand. Mr. Gopal Subramanium, learned Solicitor General appearing for the Union of India, by drawing our attention to paragraph 10 of the said affidavit submitted that in view of the decision taken by the Union of India, no direction is required from this Court. It is useful to refer paragraph 10 of the said affidavit which reads as under: 'Most respectfully, it is further submitted that for the repatriation of all Pak nationals including Mr. Jafaria, who have completed their sentence and who have been confirmed by the Pakistani authorities as Pakistani nationals, this Ministry had sought 'No Objection' from the State Governments concerned (including Government of Rajasthan in respect of Mr. Jafaria). No objection from the Government of Rajasthan in respect of Mr. Jafaria has since been received. It has accordingly been decided to repatriate Mr. Jafaria to Pakistan on 25th March, 2010 through the Attari-Wagha border'.

p. 715, margin A

4

In view of the specific information that the Government of lnrfia has taken a decision to repatriate the petitioner namely, Jafaria, to Pakistan on 25th March, 2010 through Attari-Wagha Border, no further direction is required except recording the above information. This Court appreciates the efforts made by the learned Solicitor General and the ultimate decision by the Government of India.

p. 715, margin F

5

With the above observation, the writ petition is aisposed of. R:P. Writ Petition disposed of.

p. 715, margin G