JOHN DANIEL vs THE UNION OF INDIA

2026:MHC:4303
W.P.No.37464 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
ORDERS RESERVED ON : 30.09.2026
ORDERS PRONOUNCED ON :26.10.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
W.P.No.37464 of 2026
and
W.M.P.Nos.42064 & 42065 of 2026
John Daniel ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Union of India,
Rep. by its Secretary,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
North Block,
New Delhi – 110 001.
2. The Foreigners Regional Registration
Officer-cum-Civil Authority,
Bureau of Immigration,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Government of India,
Chennai.
3. The Deputy Secretary (OCI),
Foreigners Division,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
MDCNS,
New Delhi. ... Respondents
1/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:26:00 pm )

2026:MHC:4303
W.P.No.37464 of 2026
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for issuance of a writ of certiorari, calling for the records relating to the
order bearing Office Memo No.06/FRRO/CHN/OCI/2026-817 dated
04.09.2026 passed by the second respondent under Section 7(D)(da) & (e) of
the Citizenship Act, 1955, cancelling the petitioner’s OCI registration bearing
No.A1741866, and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to
restore / revive the petitioner’s OCI registration bearing OCI.No.A1741866 and
permit the petitioner to enjoy the privileges attached to the said OCI
registration in accordance with law.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Shanmuga Sundaram
Senior Counsel
Assisted by Ms.A.G.Shakeenaa
for Mr.R.Vinayaga Vishnu
For Respondents : Dr.S.Padma
Senior Panel Counsel
O R D E R
This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of certiorari, calling for the
records relating to the impugned order dated 04.09.2026, passed under Section
7D(da)&(e) of the Citizenship Act, 1955 (hereinafter the Act), cancelling the
petitioner's OCI registration bearing No. A1741866, and consequently to direct
the respondents to restore the petitioner's OCI registration and permit him to
enjoy the privileges attached to the said registration in accordance with law.
2/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:26:00 pm )

2026:MHC:4303
W.P.No.37464 of 2026
2. Upon hearing the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioner and perusing the material records of the case, the petitioner's case
is that he is a citizen of the United States of America and was granted
registration as an Overseas Citizen of India pursuant to his application bearing
F.No.INDC00038N15. The registration was granted on 06.02.2015. The
petitioner has deep familial, cultural and personal ties with India. He visits
India primarily for personal and family-related purposes. His mother is about
92 years old, and his sister, Lydia Margaret Daniel, reside at No.9B,
Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 600 034. The petitioner's paternal
relatives include his cousin, Caleb Graham Daniel, residing at No.6,
Thirumoorthy Nagar Main Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034; his
nd
cousin, Annie Joseph Daniel, residing at 2 Floor, Apartments,
Mehidhipatnam, Hyderabad and his uncle, Priyanand Chary, residing at Flat
th
No.FF1, 4 Floor, Sri Raghu Apartment, Municipal Employees Colony,
Vijayawada. His maternal relatives include his aunt, Fuschie Jesudas, residing
at No.156, Syrian Kandoth Colony, Coimbatore; his cousin, Myrtle Raja,
residing at Vandana Apartments, Shenoy Nagar, Chennai; his aunt,
Dr.Jemmima Philip Baskar, residing in Jamnagar, Gujarat; and another aunt,
Lizze Ganapragasam, residing in Salem, Tamil Nadu. The graves of the
petitioner's father, the late Joshua Daniel, who died on 18.10.2014; his paternal
3/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:26:00 pm )

2026:MHC:4303
W.P.No.37464 of 2026
grandfather, the late Nagabathula Daniel, who died on 18.12.1963; and other
relatives are located in the Madras Cemeteries Board Trust Christian Cemetery,
Kilpauk Garden Road, Chennai. The petitioner meets his family members, pays
his respects to his elders at the cemetery, visits his mother, and preserves close
familial bonds. In particular, he has been visiting India to meet, support, and
attend to the needs of his aged mother as a dutiful son. The petitioner also
pursued his schooling in Ooty. Thus, a significant part of his early life was
spent in India.
3. The petitioner states that he has not violated any law governing
OCI cardholders. He denied the allegations of missionary activities and
religious conversions in his explanation to the show cause notice dated
08.09.2025. In his reply to the show cause notice, he further stated that he was
not holding any office in the Laymen's Evangelical Fellowship International
(LEFI). The respondents have failed to identify with precision the dates on
which the petitioner allegedly undertook missionary activity in India; the places
where such activity was allegedly undertaken; the persons alleged to have been
converted by him; the specific acts alleged to constitute conversion; the
material evidence establishing that he personally compelled or procured any
4/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:26:00 pm )

2026:MHC:4303
W.P.No.37464 of 2026
conversion; the specific statutory provision allegedly violated by each act; and
the specific material relied upon to establish each alleged violation.
4. The petitioner contends that, although it is alleged that he
brainwashed persons in interior villages, there is no evidence disclosing even
the identity of a single person. Further, the impugned order uses the word
‘cult’, which causes grave prejudice to the petitioner. The respondents’ sole
contention is that the notification dated 04.03.2021, bearing S.O.1050(E),
makes prior permission mandatory for missionary activities. Even assuming
that such permission was required, it is for the respondents to establish, through
cogent material, that the petitioner undertook such activities in India. In fact,
the respondents have subsequently issued a direction requiring the petitioner to
obtain permission on or before 03.02.2025. The petitioner contends that this
would itself establish that he has not committed any violation. The impugned
order has been passed without affording a real and effective opportunity
contemplated under Section 7D of the Citizenship Act, 1955.
5. When the writ petition came up for hearing, Mr.R.Shanmuga
Sundaram , learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner was pressing for interim
5/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:26:00 pm )

2026:MHC:4303
W.P.No.37464 of 2026
relief. The learned Senior Panel Counsel for the respondents was requested to
take notice and place on record the instructions in that regard.
6. Despite two opportunities having already been granted and the
matter having been adjourned, the learned Senior Panel Counsel for the
respondents submitted that the draft counter affidavit had been sent to the
respondents for their consideration and signature, but the counter affidavit had
not yet been filed. Since this Court had granted repeated adjournments, it
directed the learned Senior Panel Counsel for the respondents to argue the
matter. She placed a typedset of papers on record and advanced her arguments.
7. Mr.R.Shanmuga Sundaram, learned Senior Counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner, took this Court through the show cause notice and the
petitioner's reply. He would submit that, although a general allegation was
made that the petitioner indulged in missionary activities, the materials relied
upon by the respondents, which have now been produced before this Court,
were never supplied to the petitioner to enable him to effectively contest the
allegations or to avail himself of the opportunity of hearing.
6/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:26:00 pm )

2026:MHC:4303
W.P.No.37464 of 2026
8. The learned Senior Counsel would rely on the Delhi High Court
judgment in Ashok Swain v. Union of India and Others (2025 SCC OnLine
Del 2012), more specifically, he would rely on paragraphs Nos.29 to 31 of the
judgment to contend that the opportunity afforded should be effective and real,
and that all documents should have been specifically furnished to the petitioner,
with specific incidents of missionary activities identified.
9. Per contra, Dr.S.Padma , the learned Senior Panel Counsel
appearing on behalf of the respondents, placed on record a set of materials
gathered by the respondents. It is stated that the petitioner, even in America, is
a missionary attached to an organisation, namely, the Laymen's Evangelical
Fellowship. Material downloaded from the internet, showing the petitioner
sharing the ‘Word of God’ at these meetings, has been produced before this
Court. A copy of a poster bearing the words ‘Good News for All’, advertising
speeches and messages to be delivered by the petitioner at LEF Church,
th th th
Chinnavaram Tota, Tenali, Andhra Pradesh, on 15 , 16 and 17 January 2017,
has been produced. The poster includes the petitioner's photograph and the
mobile number of the person organising the meetings.
7/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:26:00 pm )

2026:MHC:4303
W.P.No.37464 of 2026
th th
10. Materials relating to religious meetings held from 14 to 16
January 2018 in the State of Andhra Pradesh has also been produced. Repeated
complaints, received on various dates and alleging that the petitioner was
coming to India solely for missionary activities, have been produced. Material
relating to a series of religious meetings held from 15.01.2019 to 20.01.2019 at
LEF Grounds, Stuartpuram Village, Andra Pradesh, has also been produced.
The respondents have relied on various internet materials relating to the
missionary activities undertaken by the petitioner. The Sunday service
messages of the Laymen's Evangelical Fellowship International describe the
petitioner as leading a large number of missionaries and Christian workers
across the globe. They state that God has used him in revival ministry in many
congregations and describe him as a man of prayer who believes that God will
abundantly bless those who seek the Lord with an honest and open heart. The
dates and timings of various service meetings are mentioned. The annual
retreats and other activities undertaken by him are also mentioned. Placing all
the above materials on record, the learned Senior Panel Counsel for the
respondents would contend that no relief can be granted to the petitioner, as he
has violated the provisions of the Act.
8/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:26:00 pm )

2026:MHC:4303
W.P.No.37464 of 2026
11. I have considered the rival submissions on both sides and perused
the material records of the case.
12. Section 7-A of the Act provides that the Central Government
may, subject to such conditions, restrictions and manner as may be prescribed,
on an application made in that behalf, register any person as an Overseas
Citizen of India Cardholder. There is no dispute regarding the petitioner's
eligibility, as his parents are stated to be of Indian origin and, since he was born
in America, he was treated and chose to be an American Citizen. Accordingly,
the registration was rightly granted to the petitioner.
13. Section 7-D of the Act deals with the cancellation of registration.
It empowers the Government to cancel the registration if the cardholder has
violated any provisions of the Act or of any other law for time being in force,
as may be specified by the Central Government in the notification published in
the Official Gazette. Thus, it can be seen that the Central Government registers
OCI cardholders subject to such conditions, and confers rights on them in
exercise of its power under Section 7-B of the Citizenship Act, 1955.
9/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:26:00 pm )

2026:MHC:4303
W.P.No.37464 of 2026
14. While issuing S.O.1050(E) under Section 7B of the Act and
granting the privilege of a multiple-entry lifelong visa for visiting India for any
purpose, a provision has been made requiring special permission or a special
permit from the competent authority, the Foreigners Regional Registration
Officer, or the Indian Mission concerned, to undertake any missionary, public,
mountaineering, or journalistic activities. Thus, if the petitioner carries on
missionary activities without permission, the same violates Section 7B of the
Act, and the registration accordingly becomes liable to be cancelled under
Section 7D(da) of the Act.
15. A show cause notice was issued on 08.09.2025, stating that the
petitioner was engaged in missionary activity in India without special
permission and was misusing his OCI card to conduct religious activities in
India. It was further alleged that he was encouraging Christian conversions
through his evangelical activities in South India. It was specifically stated that
he was visiting India to preach and deliver religious lectures. During his visits,
he was alleged to have undertaken a series of prayers and to have preached in
the interior villages of Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, where the people were
not sufficiently literate, allegedly brainwashing them and subsequently
converting them to Christianity. It was further alleged that the petitioner led an
10/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:26:00 pm )

2026:MHC:4303
W.P.No.37464 of 2026
organisation, namely, the Laymen's Evangelical Fellowship International,
which functioned like a cult, with devotion to the Daniel family being
mandatory. Upon finding that he had not obtained special permission, the show
cause notice was issued.
16. The petitioner submitted a reply on 20.09.2025 categorically
stating that he had never been involved in missionary activities in India and had
neither engaged in nor promoted conversion, as alleged. He further denied
holding any position in the Laymen's Evangelical Fellowship and denied that
LEF was a cult. He reiterated that he had visited India only to call on his ailing
mother, family and friends. Although he had, at some point, erroneously
applied for an Indian passport, he had withdrawn the application after receiving
proper advice.
17. After considering the aforementioned explanation, the impugned
order was passed, confirming the proposal, rejecting the petitioner's
explanation, and cancelling his OCI registration.
18. There can be no contrary claim if the petitioner violates any
provision of law, including S.O.1050(E) issued by the Central Government in
11/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:26:00 pm )

2026:MHC:4303
W.P.No.37464 of 2026
exercise of its power under Section 7B of the Act that his OCI registration is
liable to be cancelled. If the petitioner preaches and undertakes activities to
spread the word of ‘God’, such activities would fall within the meaning of
missionary activity. Therefore, he ought to have obtained special permission in
that regard. He has not obtained such permission. Therefore, considering the
nature of the allegations made against the petitioner, the cancellation stands
justified.
19. The further contention of the learned Senior Counsel for the
petitioner is that the impugned order has been passed in violation of the
principles of natural justice. It is true that the Delhi High Court in Ashok Swain
(cited supra) , has held that the documents and all materials gathered should be
furnished and that the party should be afforded an effective and real
opportunity. The principles of natural justice are not a straight-jacket formula,
and their application depends on the facts of each case. If the petitioner had
disputed any particular incident or activity, and if the respondents relied on
only one or two incidents, the said ratio could be followed and applied in the
instant case. The respondents could then be directed to furnish the documents
collected against the petitioner, and he could be given an opportunity to deny
each and every incident.
12/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:26:00 pm )

2026:MHC:4303
W.P.No.37464 of 2026
20. However, it is evident that the petitioner is a professional
missionary who spreads the word of ‘God’ in relation to his religion. The stand
taken by him in his reply to the show cause notice and before this Court is not
disputing of any particular incident(s) or activity, but a wholesale denial. He
categorically asserts in his reply to the show cause notice and in his affidavit
that he visits India only to visit his mother and relatives.
21. On the contrary, substantial materials have been produced against
the petitioner, indicating that he has consistently been addressing
congregations, gatherings and meetings at various places in Tamil Nadu and
Andhra Pradesh and that advertisements have been issued inviting the general
public to attend his meetings. Those materials cannot be regarded by this Court
as fabricated or concocted. It is one thing to contend that the petitioner is not
involved in conversion and is only spreading the message of ‘God’. However,
it is not only for conversion, but even to be a missionary preaching his religion,
it is only a prior permission that is mandated. The petitioner has made a
categorical and sweeping statement before this Court that he has never been
involved in any missionary activities in India and has visited India only to see
his mother, family and friends, which, on its face is a lie. The remedy under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India is an equitable remedy and cannot be
13/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:26:00 pm )

2026:MHC:4303
W.P.No.37464 of 2026
extended in the face of the petitioner's blatant, bald denial and the materials
placed on record before this Court.
22. In view thereof, I am unable to accept the contention of the
learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that a further
detailed opportunity needs to be afforded to the petitioner. Accordingly, the
petitioner's prayer cannot be countenanced.
23. However, the petitioner will be free to apply for a regular visa to
visit his mother. For conduct of his meetings and religious purposes, he can
carry out his activities in India only upon being granted the requisite official
permission. With the aforesaid observations, the prayer in the writ petition
cannot be countenanced, and the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no
order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
26.10.2026

vji
Neutral citation : Yes
14/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:26:00 pm )

2026:MHC:4303
W.P.No.37464 of 2026
To
1. The Secretary,
Union of India,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
North Block,
New Delhi – 110 001.
2. The Foreigners Regional Registration
Officer-cum-Civil Authority,
Bureau of Immigration,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Government of India,
Chennai.
3. The Deputy Secretary (OCI),
Foreigners Division,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
MDCNS,
New Delhi.
15/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:26:00 pm )

2026:MHC:4303
W.P.No.37464 of 2026
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
vji
Pre-Delivery Order made in
W.P.No.37464 of 2026
and
W.M.P.Nos.42064 & 42065 of 2026
26.10.2026
16/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:26:00 pm )