Denied Permission to See Cancer-Stricken Mother, US National Wins Bombay HC Relief

The Bombay High Court has strongly criticised the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) for denying an exit permit to a US national, observing that the decision was “not at all justified” when a competent court had already allowed him to travel abroad.

The case involves James Leonard Watson, who is on bail after being booked for allegedly attempting religious conversion during a prayer gathering in Thane district last year. Despite a sessions court granting him permission to travel to the United States to attend to his ailing mother, the FRRO refused to process his exit permit, citing objections from the investigating agency.

A single-judge bench of Justice N J Jamadar ruled that such a refusal cannot override a valid judicial order. The court directed the FRRO to process Watson’s application within two days, taking into account the sessions court’s February 27 order that permitted his travel between March 9 and April 18.

Also Read: Who Dared Vote Against Kim Jong-un? North Korea's 0.07% Dissent Baffles the Internet

Watson had earlier been booked by the Bhiwandi Taluka police under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, along with charges under the state’s anti-superstition law and the Foreigners Act. He was granted bail in October 2025, with a condition requiring court permission for any international travel.

When Watson sought permission citing his mother’s illness, the sessions court allowed his plea. However, the FRRO halted the process after receiving objections from the police, prompting him to approach the high court.

The high court made it clear that administrative authorities cannot undermine judicial decisions indirectly. “A judicial order of a competent court cannot be denuded of its meaning,” the bench observed, adding that such orders must be obeyed unless set aside by a higher forum.

The court further noted that if the police were dissatisfied with the sessions court’s decision, they should have challenged it through proper legal channels instead of blocking its implementation.

With this ruling, the high court reaffirmed the primacy of judicial orders over administrative actions, while ensuring that due process is followed in matters involving individual liberty and travel rights.

Also Read: Israel Strikes Central Beirut Without Warning, Killing at Least Six in Residential Areas