Delhi High Court Issues Notice To MEA, Indian Embassy In Qatar On Plea By Father Of Incarcerated Citizen

The petitioner sought directions to facilitate consular access for his son, Muhammed Kayalvakkath Bava, who has been serving a jail sentence in Qatar since June 2016 and is due to remain incarcerated until July 2028.

Justice Sanjeev Narula heard the matter and issued notices to the respondent-authorities.

Bava was convicted for dishonour of cheques by a Qatari Court and was sentenced to undergo 12 years imprisonment.

The petition states Bava's signature was allegedly forged by his business partners to transfer shares. The petition states it is a clear case of forgery and that Bava has been unable to pursue legal action against the individuals who defrauded him due to his imprisonment.

It is stated that the petitioner registered a complaint about the forgery with the Qatari authorities, but they did not advance any further on the investigation.

Subsequently, the petitioner registered a grievance with the Consular Services Management System (MADAD) set up by the MEA, which seeks to provide assistance to Indian citizens to track Grievances pertaining to the Consular Services offered by the Indian Embassies.

The grievance was marked as closed stating that the Mission has extended all possible assistance within the limits of local laws.

The petitioner thus approached the High Court seeking the respondent-authorities' intervention to ensure that his son is provided with legal representation and legal aid before the Foreign Court.

The petitioner argues that Bava is entitled to his rights under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention for Consular Relations (VCCR) for consular access, which has been denied in the present case.

He states that the request for consular access and for assistance in legal representation has been rejected by the MEA without any application of mind.

The petitioner prays that the MEA (respondent No. 1) and the Indian Embassy at Doha, Qatar (respondent No. 2) be directed to grant consular access to Bava,

Further, to ensure procedural protections for Bava during his period of imprisonment such as frequent visitation rights for his family members, providing a translator/interpreter throughout the investigation/court proceedings and providing all official documents pertaining to his arrest, detention, investigation and other court processes.

It is also prayed that the authorities appoint a lawyer for Bava to enable him to prosecute the fraud case.

Case title: Kunhibava Union Of India And Anr. (W.P.(C) 17128/2024)