Delhi High Court Upholds Defence of India Rules Governing Enemy Properties, Dismisses Constitutional Challenge

The Delhi High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of key provisions of the Defence of India Rules, 1962 and the Defence of India Rules, 1971 that deal with “enemy property” in India. The Court dismissed a petition challenging Rules 133(I)(1) and 133(R) of the 1962 Rules and Rules 130 and 147 of the 1971 Rules.

The case was heard by a Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela. The Court held that the petitioners failed to present any strong legal basis to question the validity of these provisions.

Rule 133(I)(1) defines the term “enemy subject”, while Rule 133(R) gives the Central Government the power to declare transfers made by an enemy as void. Similarly, Rule 130 of the 1971 Rules deals with definitions, and Rule 147 empowers the government to invalidate such transfers.

The Court observed that the challenge to Rule 133(R) was misplaced because there was no declaration in the present case declaring the property transfer void under that rule. As a result, the challenge could not be sustained.

These observations were made while dismissing a plea filed by Ashan Ur-Rab and others, which challenged the classification of a Delhi property as “enemy property” in 2010. The property had been vested in the Custodian of Enemy Property for India.

The petitioners argued that the original owner, Haji Mohammad Muslim, was an Indian citizen when he sold the property in 1968 and that the government wrongly relied on a 1965 notification that vested properties belonging to Pakistani nationals in the custodian.

However, the Court accepted the findings of the Custodian that the original owner had migrated to Pakistan in 1964. Therefore, the 1965 notification applied, and the property was rightly treated as enemy property.

The Court concluded that the petitioners failed to prove that the property should not vest with the Custodian of Enemy Property.