Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J.
S. Muniasamy - Appellant
Versus
The Union of India, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, New Delhi & Others - Respondent
W.P.(MD)No. 22222 of 2022
Decided On : 21-09-2022
Passport Renewal - Criminal Proceedings - Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act 2002, Passports Act 1967 - Section 5(2), Section 6(2) - The court discussed the legal provisions of the Passports Act, 1967, particularly Section 5(2) and Section 6(2), and their application in the context of criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner's son. The court also referred to a Notification issued by the Central Government for regulating the exercise of power by the Passport Authority under Section 6(2)(f). The court emphasized that a passport can be issued or renewed only on the basis of production of orders from the concerned Court permitting the applicant to depart from India, as per the legal provisions and the Notification.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a Writ of Mandamus to direct the issuance of a Renewal Passport for his son, who was facing criminal proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act 2002. The petitioner's son had suppressed the information of the pending criminal case while applying for passport renewal, leading to the refusal of renewal by the authorities.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's son had suppressed the information of the pending criminal case, which was the main ground for the refusal of passport renewal. The court also considered the legal provisions of the Passports Act, 1967, and the Notification issued by the Central Government, emphasizing the requirement of orders from the concerned Court permitting the applicant to depart from India for passport issuance or renewal.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner's son was entitled to the renewal of his passport despite the pending criminal proceedings and the suppression of information regarding the same.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner's son was not entitled to the renewal of his passport without the necessary orders from the concerned Court permitting him to depart from India, as required by the legal provisions and the Notification issued by the Central Government.
Final Decision: The court directed the petitioner's son to make a representation to the Consulate General of India, Indian Embassy at Abudapy, along with a copy of the court's order. Upon receipt of the representation, the Passport of the petitioner's son was to be re-issued/renewed for a period of two years, with the condition that he must come to India and participate in the criminal proceedings.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to issue the Renewal Passport of the petitioner's son Sellamuthu filed Renewal application No.22-2002808766.)
1. The Petitioner has prayed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to issue the Renewal Passport of the petitioner's son Sellamuthu filed Renewal application No.22-2002808766.
2. Heard Mr.M.Muniasamy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mrs.L.Victoria Gowri, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India and Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh, learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), who takes notice for the respondents. By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has filed this writ petition on behalf of his son M.Sellamuthu. He would further submit that the second respondent was issued the passport to the petitioner's son, namely, Mr.M.Sellamuthu on 30.08.2012 and the same was valid up to 29.08.2022. The petitioner's son is working in private concern at Abudabi. The petitioner's son applied for Renewal of the passport and he received a communication from the Consulate General of India, Embassy (Kuwait), Abudapy to the effect that Criminal Case is pending against the petitioner's son M. Sellamuthu. On that ground, the second respondent refused to re-issue/Renewal of the passport of the petitioner's son.
4. He further submitted that in the police verification report, it was found that the Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram had given an adverse report, which is updated in the system informing that a criminal case in Cr.No.108/2021 registered at Kadaladi Police Station, under Section 294(b), 323 and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act 2002 is pending against the petitioner's son. The petitioner submitted that now the trial against the petitioner's son M.Sellamuthu is pending. Further, the petitioner's son has suppressed the material information of criminal case pending against him, has presented re-issue of passport application No.22-2002808766 submitted at Embassy of India, Abudaby. Now, the petitioner's son accepted the case in Cr.No. 108/2021 registered against him in Kadaladi Police Station. Thereafter, investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has been filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kadalady in C.C.No.88 of 2021. The petitioner's son passport has expired on 29.08.2022 even if the petitioner's son wants to return back to India and attend the Criminal proceedings, the passport has to be renewed and only thereafter, the petitioner's son can proceed further or else the petitioner's son Sellamuthu will be liable for unauthorized stay at Kuwait country. Being left with no other alternative efficacious remedy, the petitioner constrained to file this writ petition before this Court.
5. The petitioner also annexed the Office Memorandum of Government of India, Ministry of External Affairs, PSP Division, dated 10.10.2019, wherein, certain guidelines are issued for issuance of passport.
6. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the third respondent would submit that except this case, no other criminal case is pending against the petitioner's son.
7. The main ground that has been raised by the respondents while opposing the re-issue/renewal of the passport is that, criminal proceedings are pending against the petitioner's son before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kadaladi in C.C.No.88 of 2021. According to the respondents, the petitioner has concealed the pendency of the criminal proceedings and therefore, he is not entitled for the re-issue/renewal of the Passport. It is seen from the FIR that the complainant's son married the petitioner's daughter and the dispute between the family members. Due to the family dispute, the petitioner's son
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a passport can be issued or renewed in the context of a pending criminal case only on the basis of production of orders from the concerned Cou....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the issuance or renewal of a passport when a criminal case is pending is subject to the production of orders from the concerned Court permitti....
A passport can be renewed despite pending criminal case; prior court permission is only needed for actual travel abroad.
Passport issuance or renewal is subject to the production of orders from the concerned Court permitting the applicant to depart from India, and participation in the criminal proceedings is essential.
Under Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967, the refusal to renew a passport requires the pendency of criminal proceedings before a criminal court; mere registration of an FIR or pendency of an ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
