New Delhi: The Union government introduced a new draft bill aimed at overhauling India’s immigration system in the Lok Sabha Tuesday.
Among key changes, the Immigration and Foreigners Bill, 2025, allows the government to bar foreigners from entering or staying in case of threats to India’s national security, sovereignty and integrity, over their relations with a foreign state, if there is a public health issue, or “on such other grounds as the Central Government may, specify”.
The provision even makes the immigration officer’s decision “final and binding”, without any appeal mechanism.
Another provision bars a person from leaving India if their presence is required by any authorised agency or on any other grounds specified by the government.
The bill also explicitly allows for the collection of biometric information from any foreigners, in addition to the existing provisions that allow their photograph, handwriting specimens and signature to be taken. This potentially expands on the existing practices in visa processing, while providing statutory backing to collection of such biometric data.
While introducing the bill, Minister of State for Home Affairs Nityanand Rai said the bill will regulate the entry of foreigners.
While government is providing facilities for more tourists to visit the country, it is its priority to ensure peace and sovereignty in India remains intact, he said.
If passed, the bill will repeal and replace 4 existing laws—the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920; Registration of Foreigners Act, 1939; Foreigners Act, 1946; and Immigration (Carriers’ Liability) Act, 2000.
The Statement of Objects and Reasons (SOR) said that 3 of four laws were from the pre-Constitution period and were brought in during extraordinary times—during World War 1 and 2.
“The proposed legislation is being enacted to avoid multiplicity and overlapping of laws on the same or related subject and to comply with the Government of India’s policy of simplification of laws,” the Statement of Objects and Reasons (SOR) said.
Arrest without warrant
The new draft bill clarifies and expands the Union government’s powers on the ability to control the entry, exit, and stay of foreigners.
For instance, any person who enters India without valid documents can be arrested without a warrant. This stands even if there is a “reasonable suspicion” that the person does not possess valid documents.
The current Foreigners Act does not grant any such powers. It provides for penalties for anybody who violates the provisions of the law.
Similarly, the current Registration of Foreigners Act provides for registration of foreigners when entering or exiting India or during the course of their stay. Expanding on this, the new bill now makes it mandatory for the foreigners to immediately register themselves with the concerned registration officer upon arrival in India.
Building on the provisions under the 1946 law, which place the onus of registration on the foreigner, the bill places significant obligations on institutions to report information about foreigners to registration officers.
For instance, under clause 10 of the new draft bill, every hospital, nursing home, or any other medical institution that provides medical, lodging, or sleeping facility on their premises is also obligated to furnish information on any foreigner “taking indoor medical treatment or their attendant for whom such lodging or sleeping facility has been provided”.
Clause 9 of the Bill places a similar obligation on universities and educational institutions in India.
Higher penalties & legal backing for a bureau
The new bill also introduces stricter fines and punishments.
Under the revised rules in the new draft bill, any foreigner who enters any area in India without a valid passport or other travel document, including a visa, shall be punishable with either imprisonment upto 5 years, fine of upto Rs 5 lakh, or both.
The penalty for using or supplying forged or fraudulently obtained passport and other travel document ranges from Rs 1 to 10 lakh.
Currently, the Passport (Entry into India) Act regulates the entry of foreigners into India. Under it, the government was allowed to make rules imposing a 5-year jail term or 50,000 fine or both, for violating provisions related to holding valid passports. Additionally, the Foreigners Act said that anybody who lived in India without a valid visa could be punished with a five year jail term and fine.
Moreover, the Immigration (Carriers’ Liability) Act, 2000, says a penalty of Rs 1 lakh can be imposed on any carriers liable for transporting passengers into India without valid travel documents.
The new bill increases the fine to a minimum of Rs 2 lakh and a maximum of 5 lakh. It also says that if such a penalty is not paid, the civil authority or immigration officer can recover it by seizing or detaining the aircraft or the ship, or by seizing, detaining or selling any goods or properties belonging to the carrier, or by any other means.
It also retains a version of Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, which places the burden of proving whether a person is a foreigner or not on the person whose legal status is under challenge. This is considered a departure from principles of evidence law, where, in criminal cases, prosecution has to prove the defendant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Furthermore, while a Bureau of Immigration was established as a department under the Ministry of Home Affairs in 1971, the new bill now provides legal backing to this Bureau, and also explains the functions of immigration officers.
The financial memorandum attached to the bill acknowledges this, and makes it clear that a Bureau of Immigration with officers is already in place and functioning. Therefore, the bill is not likely to involve additional expenditure from the Consolidated Fund of India.
Opposition leaders raise concerns
In his rebuttal in the Lok Sabha, Congress leader Manish Tewari objected to the provisions allowing the government to bar entry of foreigners, claiming that it had the “potential to be misused if any government of the day feels that the political views or ideological beliefs of any individual or…dissenter are not conformist in nature with the disposition of the current establishment”.
He said that this violates Article 14 of the Constitution which guarantees equality before law and equal protection of laws to “any person”, which includes foreigners as well.
Tewari also objected to Clause 14 of the new draft law, which grants the civil authority the power to “control places frequented by foreigners”, including closing such premises. He said it violated Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, which guarantees to citizens the right to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.
I rise to oppose the Immigration and Foreigners Bill. This Bill is a violation of our fundamental rights on many counts.
Clause 3 (1), through its first proviso, grants omnibus powers to the union government to restrict the entry of any foreigner into India ostensibly on the… pic.twitter.com/UJaIIdPt3U
— Congress (@INCIndia) March 11, 2025
Trinamool Congress MP Saugata Roy said that placing obligations on educational institutions and nursing homes would “restrict in-flow of talent and know how in the country in the fields of academic and medical science”.
Tewari also alleged that this obligation on nursing homes and medical institutions runs contrary to principles of medical ethics and violates international commitments.
However, Rai clarified that such orders were already in place, and that the government was now merely bringing it under the law.
Gauhati-based lawyer Aman Wadud said the government should have made changes to the burden of proof requirement.
Wadud, who works on citizenship cases, highlighted that because the Foreigners Act was brought in during extraordinary times to deal with people who were fleeing to India, the burden of proof was on those foreigners.
However, “all these years the 1946 Act and the draconian reverse burden was used to harass Indian citizens in Assam, now that the government of India is repealing the Foreigners Act, 1946 through this Bill, it should have acknowledge the ground realities and put the burden of proof on the state as this is not an extraordinary time, but the Bill has not made any change on burden of proof,” he said.
(Edited by Sanya Mathur)
Also Read: Is brand India dimming? Pollution panic, dire warnings for women, big dip in foreign tourists