ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court seeking quashment of an endorsement dated 03.11.2023, which rejects the grant of a passport to the petitioner and has sought a consequential direction to reissue the passport for a period of ten years. 2. Heard the learned Senior counsel Sri.P.P.Hegde, appearing for the petitioner, learned HCGP Sri.Kiran Kumar, appearing for respondent No.1 and the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, Sri.Shanthi Bhushan H., representing respondent No.2.

3. Learned Senior counsel Sri.P.P.Hedge, submits that the passport is not issued on the score that there is proceeding pending before the concerned Court in Crime No.296/2016, in which the Police after investigation have filed a 'B' report. 4. The concerned Court has not passed any order either accepting or rejecting the 'B' report.

5. In the interregnum, the passport of the petitioner expires and therefore, he has submitted his application seeking re-issuance of the said passport. The co-ordinate Bench, in W.P.No.11941/2023, disposed on 04.07.2023, has held as follows:

" ORDER

The short grievance of the petitioner who holds Indian Passport and who intends to travel abroad is as to non-issuance of Clearance Certificate by the jurisdictional police for facilitating issuance of Police Clearance Certificate by the Passport Authority in terms of Rule 2(c)of Passport Rules, 1980. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that right to travel abroad being a facetof fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution in the light of decision in MANEKA GANDHI vs. UNION OF INDIA, AIR 1978 SC 597, there cannot be unreasonable delay in the issuance of clearance certificate by the respondent police. He also fairly brings to the notice of the court about his alleged involvement in CrimeNo.226/2020 of Ramamurthy Police Station wherein after investigation, ‘B’ report has been filed before the jurisdictional Magistrate, who has given permission to travel abroad vide order dated 01.04.2023. 2. Learned Sr.CGC appearing for the

RespondentNo.1-UOI, Respondent No.2-RPO and learned HCGP appearing for Respondent No.3 oppose the petition contending that mere filing of ‘B’ Report would not do; the Apex Court in MRS. RUPAN DEOL BAJAJ & ANOTHER vs. K.P.S. GILL & ANOTHER, AIR 1996 SC 309 has indicated that unless some order is passed thereon by the court, the criminal case is not closed, especially when the complainant has right to file the protest petition. So contending they seek dismissal of the writ petition.3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Petition Papers, this court is inclined to direct the respondent-police to issue the Clearance Certificate inasmuch as the Court before whom the subject criminal case is pending itself has granted permission to travel abroad. Court is yet to pass a formal order on 'B'

Report, is beside the point.

In view of the above, this petition is disposed off directing the jurisdictional police to issue Clearance Certificate to the petitioner within two weeks so that the petitioner can seek grant of Police Clearance Certificate at the hands of

Regional Passport Officer.

Learned X ACMM, Bengaluru is requested to consider and pass orders on ‘B’ Report in the subject case expeditiously. All contentions in that regard are kept open.

Costs made easy."

6. In the light of the order passed by the co-ordinate

Bench (Supra), the State is required to consider the grant of

Police clearance certificate.

7. Learned Deputy Solicitor General of India,

Sri.Shanthi Bhushan H., on instructions placed before the Court would make his submissions that if the Police would grant a Police clearance certificate to the hands of the Regional

Passport Officer, a regular passport would be issued in favour of the petitioner.

8. The submission is placed on record.

9. In the light of the said submission, no further orders need be issued directing the respondents to act in a particular manner. It would suffice, if the petition is disposed