Back
2024 Supreme(Mad) 1016
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
M.Abul Kalam Azath - Petitioner
Versus
The Regional Passport Officer and ors. – Respondents
W.P(MD)No.11338 of 2019
Decided On : 19-01-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr.I.Mohamed Razvi
For the Respondent:Mr.S.Paramasivam, Senior Panel Counsel, Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanidhi, Government Advocate
IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that the passport authority must consider the possibility of issuing a passport even when criminal proceedings are pending, provided the applicant meets specific conditions set forth in the guidelines.
Headnote:
PASSPORT - RENEWAL OF PASSPORT - The court examined the provisions of the Passport Act, 1967, particularly Section 6(2)(f), which allows the refusal of a passport if criminal proceedings are pending against the applicant. The court interpreted this provision in conjunction with the guidelines issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, emphasizing that the passport authority must consider the applicant's situation and provide a pathway for renewal, even in the presence of pending criminal cases, provided certain conditions are met.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged a notice from passport authorities regarding the refusal to renew his passport due to pending criminal proceedings against him in Crime No.346 of 2016. He claimed he was falsely implicated and sought to quash the notice and allow him to travel abroad.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the passport authority's refusal was based solely on the adverse police verification report without considering the possibility of issuing a passport under specific conditions outlined in the statutory guidelines. The court emphasized the need for a balanced approach in such cases.
Issues: Whether the passport authority can refuse to renew a passport solely based on pending criminal proceedings without considering the applicant's circumstances and the provisions for obtaining a No Objection Certificate.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that while the passport authority has the right to refuse a passport under Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act, it must also adhere to the guidelines issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, which allow for the issuance of a passport under certain conditions, including obtaining a No Objection Certificate from the court.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of with directions for the petitioner to file an affidavit of undertaking and obtain a No Objection Certificate from the concerned court, after which the passport authority was to consider the renewal of the passport for a temporary period.
ORDER :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the impugned order passed by the second respondent in letter reference No.SCN/308468221/19, dated 04.04.2019 and quash the same as illegal and consequently directing the respondents to permit the petitioner travel abroad and ensure the passport bearing No.Z5253416 for using of travel abroad.
Notice, dated 04.04.2019 issued by the passport authorities, calling upon the petitioner to offer his explanation as to the criminal case registered against the petitioner in Crime No.346 of 2016, for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 147, 294b IPC is under challenge in this writ petition.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has applied for renewal of his passport on 25.03.2019 and the same was renewed and re-issued to the petitioner. Thereafter, the passport authorities have sent a notice, dated 04.04.2019 to the petitioner, calling upon him to offer his explanation on the adverse police verification report of the respondents 3 & 4 that he is involved in Crime No.346 of 2016, on the file of B3 Kenikarai Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 147, 294b IPC. According to the petitioner, he has been falsely roped in the case in Crime No.346 of 2016 and no final report has been filed before the concerned Magistrate Court. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court in the year 2019.
3.The learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 & 2 submits that based on the adverse verification report of the respondents 3 & 4, they have issued the notice to the petitioner. The petitioner ought to have appeared before the passport authorities and offered his explanation. However, without doing so, the petitioner has approached this Court.
4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 3 & 4 submits that in case in Crime No.346 of 2016, a final report has been filed before the Principal Sub Judge, Ramnad and the same was taken on file as SC No.139 of 2022 and the next date of hearing is 05.03.2023.
5.The Passport Authority can refuse the passport and any travel documents under Section 6 of the Passport Act, 1967. Section 6(2)(F) of the Act would be relevant and the same is extracted as under:-
“6.Refusal of passports, travel documents, etc-
...
(2)Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the passport authority shall refuse to issue a passport or travel document for visiting any foreign country under clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section 5 on any one or more of the following grounds, and on no other ground, namely –
...
(f) that proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant are pending before a Criminal Court in India.”
6. The above provision enables the Passport Authority to refuse the passport or travel document to an applicant on the ground that proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant is pending before a Criminal Court.
7. The Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, has issued a statutory notification in GSR.570(E) dated 25.08.1993 with certain guidelines by providing relief to those applicants against whom criminal proceedings are pending before the Courts that they can obtain the passport by obtaining No Objection Certificate from the concerned Court and also by filing an undertaking as prescribed in the notification.
8. Ordinarily, the duration of a passport as per Rule 12 of the Passport Rules is for a period of 10 years. In the event if the applicant is facing any criminal proceedings, the passport may be issued by restricting the period. Therefore, the Passport Authority is not justified in not deciding the application filed by the petitioner for renewal of passport by referring the pendency of any criminal case before the Court.
9. Accordi
