Bombay High Court

MOHAMMED ISMAIL ABDUL KHALIKversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS THR. THE CHIEF SECRETARY AND ORS

Decided: 6 February 2026
Disposal: Dismissed
Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE GAUTAM A ANKHAD

Holding

The petition is dismissed as it is not a public interest litigation and lacks substantive merit.

Summary

Mohammed Ismail Abdul Khalik filed a petition seeking a direction to a Special Investigation Team regarding several FIRs and a declaration that section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1964 is unconstitutional. The respondents, including the State of Maharashtra and the Union of India, submitted that the 1946 Foreigners Act has been repealed and replaced by the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025, and that its constitutional validity had been upheld by the Supreme Court in Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India (2005). The Court observed that the petition did not qualify as a public interest litigation and lacked substantive merit. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition, holding that no relief could be granted.

Issues considered

Whether the petition qualifies as a public interest litigation.
Whether section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1964 is unconstitutional or ultra vires.
Whether the Court can direct the Special Investigation Team to investigate the specified FIRs.

Legislation cited

Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025

Subjects

public interest litigation
constitutional validity
foreigners act
ultra vires
special investigation team
petition dismissal

Judgment

                                                                                       902-PIL.2.2026.doc


        JVS.
                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                           CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
             Digitally
             signed by

JAYANT
VISHWANATH
SALUNKE
             JAYANT
             VISHWANATH
             SALUNKE
             Date:
                                        PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 2 OF 2026
             2026.03.04
             13:28:19
             +0530




                          Mohammed Ismail Abdul Khalik                 }      Petitioner
                                Versus
                          State of Maharashtra & Ors.                  }      Respondents

                          None for the Petitioner.
                          Mr. Pavan S. Patil with Mr. Shubham S. and Mr. Tanmay
                          Deshmukh, Advocate for Respondent No. 7-UoI.
                          Mr. B. V. Samant, Additional Government Pleader with
                          Ms.G. R. Raghuwanshhi, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 6.

                                         CORAM:       SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, CJ. &
                                                      GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.

                                         DATE:        6th FEBRUARY 2026

                          P.C.:
                                  No one appears on behalf of the petitioner.
                          2.      The    petitioner   seeks   a   direction   with   respect   to   the
                          investigation by a Special Investigation Team in First Information
                          Report Nos. 40 of 2025, 51 of 2025, 138 of 2025 and 103 of 2025.
                          He is also seeking a declaration that section 9 of the Foreigners Act,
                          1964 is unconstitutional and ultra vires.
                          3.      Mr. Pavan S. Patil, the learned counsel for the respondent
                          no.7-Union of India tenders a copy of the Immigration and
                          Foreigners Act, 2025 in substitution of the Foreigners Act, 1946
                          which has been repealed. The same is taken on record.
                          4.      The learned counsel for the respondent no. 7-Union of India
                          submits that the constitutional validity of the Foreigners Act, 1946
                          as such has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
                          “Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India & Ors.” (2005) 5 SCC 665.


                                                                  1
                                                       902-PIL.2.2026.doc


5.   This petition is not in the nature of Public Interest Litigation.
It has no substance as well.
6.   Public Interest Litigation No. 2 of 2026 is dismissed.


 [GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.]                          [CHIEF JUSTICE]




                                  2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…