Residents' permits

capt_mahajan

I am with dzi on this one. Dr. DeLight is skating on thin ice, IMHO- based only on what s/he has posted here.

Breaking the law because an official overlooked it for whatever reason- or even suggested the course of action- will be not much of a defence in case another official wants to question this kind of stay.

__________________
.
Outside the machine

Nick-H

Thief: Can I throw a brick through this window, and steel the jewels?

Policeman: Sure! No problem!

Yes, it's daft to suggest that makes the robbery "legal" --- and I agree that it looks very much like the logic that I applied in my post 88!

Both of you should be aware that my position on this (give or take a detail here or there) is the same as yours. India does not extend freedom to immigrants, and much that is going on of late says that that position is hardening. You may have noticed the final paragraph of my post

The scenario Dzi' gives in her last paragraph is far, far more likely to happen to anyone who thinks that a >6-month tourist visa means they can stay >6-months.

Dzi makes much of the Indian government being bound by the Indian law, to which I can only really say, "that would be nice!". Hey, this is India, and we are like that, only!

There are exceptions. All it takes is a few words scrawled on a passport and an official stamp. Some of those exceptions may have about as much long term security as a chocolate fireguard. I have heard of a person, married to an Indian, staying here for decades, and then being given ten days to leave the country: relying on any kind of exception, or even on the security of it if it happens, is pipe dreaming
Yes, agreed entirely: no security.

I suspect that there is more that what he has posted here. He has, earlier, posted about marrying an Indian --- but that, in itself, without going through the correct change of visa/PIO/whatever, is, indeed, no guarantee

dzibead

"Chocolate fireguard"! That's a new one to me! I like it!

__________________
"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power." - Abraham Lincoln
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." - Voltaire

Nick-H

Old Brit saying, Dzi... there are others on similar lines, but I can't think of them just now...

Its the kind of wit I associate with the Scots --- but I have no real idea of its origin.

capt_mahajan

My post was also to try to point out that a convenient and illegal ruling by a lower official means diddly if it is re-examined later: and it can be at any time.

At best, it is overruled. At worst, one can be involved in a bribery investigation and suffer the usual consequences.

Nick-H

Yes. Also favours granted by officers of one persuasion may be resented by those of another.

dzibead

Another thing that bugs me about people violating the terms of these ten-year tourist visas, which are plainly not intended to be used to settle in India and become a long-term "resident" there or to acquire real property there while still a foreign national (as Dr. DeLight has so proudly done) is that as and if the abuse (yes, abuse) of these visas becomes more wide-spread, the Indian Government may decide to stop issuing them, which would eliminate a nice convenience for those who would like to apply for them and use them properly and legally. For example, as a result of all the shenanigans in Goa, we've seen the crackdowns on British visa applicants, who are usually now limited to 6-month or shorter visas when previously one-year visas were not difficult to get. So to any of my fellow Americans who are now abusing their ten-year tourist visas: thanks a bunch ... for nothing.

Nick-H

Actually, previously one-year visas were quite hard to get in uk. Go back a few years and it used to say on the HCI-London site that they were only for eg members of the travel trade making frequent visits.

Still, I agree in principle, and have thought the same thing myself. It is all a part of the current hardening of India's visa policy.

Speaking as a foreigner living very legally in India, every hardening still concerns me: what is legal today may be illegal tomorrow.

dzibead

I thought it was the five-year visas for people in the travel trade that were hard to get.

Nick-H

I don't think so, dzi, because otherwise, people like me who came once a calendar year, but possibly twice in any given 12-month period would have gone for 12-monthers.

I'm not going under oath on this, though

NonIndianResident

I agree with Nick (as always) and think Dr.Delight is skating on thin ice. However, I do have personal experience to back up the good Dr's position. I once had a one-year visa with a 180-day-max-stay stipulation, but I calculated "6 months" instead of "180 days" and tried to leave the country (at IGI Delhi) about four days too late. The first guy at the counter said I'd have to go back to the FRRO in Delhi and get a registration. No pleading would work.

So we wandered over to the other set of counters and tried afresh, with my Indian spouse going first to try to charm the immigration clerk. He was charmed, we were all grand friends, everything was wonderful, and then his face fell: I would have to go back to the FRRO and get a registration. We thought maybe he'd change his mind and let me scoot through, and then a rather imposingly grim immigration officer came over to peruse the situation. "Sunk!" we thought, and faced the sure fate of trying to retrieve checked baggage and return to the city. But the immigration officer suddenly smiled and waved us through.

Morals of the story:
1) They appeared to only want me to register at the FRRO, and did NOT say I would be arrested or detained for overstaying the maximum stay. (My visa was still valid for several more months)

2) As has been pointed out, so many of these rules in this country depend on the mood of the officer!

dzibead

Well, NRI, I think the real "moral" of your story is that a lot of the immigration officers don't know what they're doing, which is what a couple of us (me included) have been saying for ages about a lot of the FROs. Anyway, are you sure that what they really wanted you to do was get "a registration" and not an exit permit , which, it appears from experiences reported by some others who have overstayed, is required as a condition for leaving the country after an overstay?

kmalik

My reading of the NRI story is that:

• The 180 day limit is real and overstaying is a violation. Clearly, overstaying a few days is a minor violation, regularized with only a minor penalty.
• The scenario involving NRI is hardly analogous to that of the 'good doctor' who, based upon the information in this thread, claims to be (over-)staying the 180 day limit well beyond few days. Hardly any conclusion drawn from NRI's experience is directly transferable to overstaying by months or years.
• Finally, I suppose the Indian government is going to let anyone overstaying out, perhaps with some penalties. The only biting penalty it can impose is with regards to granting a visa to to India. While a minor violation might be overlooked, I doubt overstaying by significant duration would be dealt with nonchalance.

Of course, as with everything involving the Indian government - your mileage may vary.

NonIndianResident

By the way, I'm not an NRI, I'm an NIR. If I were an NRI I would be an Indian citizen and wouldn't have to worry about visas to stay in India!