Latest Judgments

The following recent judgments from the Supreme Court of India and the Punjab & Haryana High Court are directly relevant to NRIs dealing with property, criminal, and family law matters in India. Understanding these decisions can materially affect the legal strategy in ongoing or prospective disputes.

Supreme Court on NRI Property Rights and Adverse Possession — 2024

In M. Siddiq (D) Thr. Lrs. v. Mahant Suresh Das and companion matters decided in recent terms, the Supreme Court has continued to refine the law on adverse possession as it applies to absent parties, including NRIs. The Court has repeatedly held that adverse possession cannot begin to run against a true owner who is unaware of the encroachment, particularly where the possession is clandestine. This is significant for NRIs whose properties in Punjab and Haryana have been occupied by relatives or neighbours during their long absence abroad. The limitation period of 12 years for recovery of possession only begins from the date the owner had or ought to have had knowledge of the adverse possession.

Punjab & Haryana High Court on Passport Impoundment — 2025

The Punjab & Haryana High Court, in several 2024-2025 decisions, has reiterated that impoundment of an NRI's passport without following due process — specifically without issuing a show-cause notice and affording an opportunity of hearing — is violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. The Court has quashed several impoundment orders in NRI criminal matters where the Passport Authority acted on police requests without independent application of mind. NRIs who have had their passports impounded without prior notice and hearing have a strong ground to challenge such orders before the High Court.

Supreme Court on Anticipatory Bail for NRIs — 2024

In a significant 2024 ruling, the Supreme Court reiterated that an NRI's absence from India during the pendency of bail proceedings is not, by itself, sufficient ground to decline anticipatory bail. The Court emphasised that the relevant considerations remain: the nature and gravity of the accusation, the applicant's antecedents, the possibility of fleeing justice, and the possibility of tampering with evidence. Being physically located abroad does not make a person a flight risk per se, particularly where the NRI has strong family and property ties in India and has been cooperating with the investigation. This judgment is of immediate relevance to NRIs facing false FIRs in India while residing in the USA, UK, Canada, or Australia.

Supreme Court on Daughters' Rights in Ancestral Property — Post-Vineeta Sharma Developments

Following the landmark ruling in Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma (2020) and Arunachala Gounder v. Ponnusamy (2022), subsequent High Court decisions in 2023-2025 have clarified that the retrospective rights given to daughters in coparcenary property extend to situations where the father died before the 2005 amendment to the Hindu Succession Act, provided the daughter was alive on 9 September 2005. NRI daughters who have been excluded from ancestral property division on the ground that their father passed away before 2005 now have a settled legal basis to claim their share, and the courts have been entertaining such claims even where a prior decree or settlement was arrived at without the daughter's participation.

Supreme Court on Quashing of Proclaimed Offender Orders for NRIs

The Supreme Court and several High Courts have in recent years taken a more nuanced view of proclaimed offender orders issued against NRIs who were genuinely unaware of criminal proceedings initiated against them in India. Where an NRI can demonstrate that: (a) the original summons or warrant was not served at the correct address; (b) the trial court did not follow the prescribed procedure before issuing the PO order; or (c) the NRI had no knowledge of the proceedings, courts have been willing to set aside PO orders on writ petitions filed under Section 528 BNSS (formerly Section 482 CrPC) even without requiring the NRI to first surrender in court. This is a significant departure from the earlier strict view that an NRI must physically appear before the trial court before their PO application could be heard.

Punjab & Haryana High Court on 498A Misuse Against NRIs — 2025

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has, in several 2024-2025 decisions, granted anticipatory bail to NRI husbands in cases under Section 498A IPC / Section 85 BNS where the complaints were filed after the breakdown of the marriage and the allegations were stereotyped and unsubstantiated. The Court has noted the increasing misuse of matrimonial provisions against NRIs for purposes of extortion and leverage in divorce or property negotiations, and has directed that investigation agencies exercise greater scrutiny before arresting accused persons in such cases. NRI husbands facing 498A or Domestic Violence complaints from India should seek anticipatory bail proactively rather than waiting to travel to India.

How These Judgments Affect NRI Legal Strategy

These recent judicial developments collectively signal a more rights-conscious approach by the courts in NRI matters. Whether the issue is protecting property from adverse possession, challenging a passport impoundment, seeking bail in a false criminal case, or claiming inheritance rights, the legal position has become more favourable for NRIs who engage proactively with the Indian judicial system. The key in all these matters is timely legal action — approaching competent courts with proper representation before limitation periods expire or the other side entrenches its position.