ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused in C.C.No.997 of 2022 pending on the file of XI-Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Secunderabad. The offences registered against the petitioner are under Sections 420 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘I.P.C’) and under Section 12 (1) (b)

of Indian Passport Act, 1967.

2. The facts of the case are that on 14.08.2021 at 1900 hours, respondent No.2 lodged a complaint before the police stating that her husband i.e., petitioner herein, obtained Police Clearance Certificate which was cleared by Karkhana Police, without proper verification, as a D.V.C. case is pending against him in Bombay since 2018. Further, he has also given false particulars to a public servant in Telangana and Indian High Commission at Botswana while issuing a new passport. As such, prayed to take necessary action against him.

3. Heard Sri P.Vamsheedhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri D.Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1-State.

4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is bar under Section 15 of the Passport Act. The investigating officer failed to contemplate the statutory provisions of law i.e., prior sanction of Central Government is necessary, as such, the offence under Section 12 (1) (b) of the Passport Act, does not attract to the petitioner and the allegation of obtaining passport by suppressing the fact is un- sustainable and unreliable. For the purpose of relevancy, Section 15 of the Passport Act, is extracted hereunder :

“Previous sanction of Central Government necessary-No prosecution shall be instituted against any person in respect of any offence under this Act without the previous sanction of the Central Government or such officer or authority as may be authorized by that Government by order in writing in this behalf.”

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in Malcolm War Macleod Vs State of West Bengal in C.R.R.No.4057 of 2008 and the judgment of High Court of Kerala in Crl.MC.No.4904 of 2013. He also relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu Vs CBI1, and judgment of this Court in Venkata Siva Kumar Yadhanapudi Vs Union of India2, wherein it was observed that pending DVC is not a bar in obtaining passport. As such, it is nothing but abuse of process of law. Hence, prayed this Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.

6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the said contentions and prayed to dismiss this petition.

7. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, it is seen that respondent No.2 filed a complaint stating that petitioner herein obtained passport suppressing the pendency of D.V.C. case. The main contention of petitioner herein is that there is bar under Section 15 of the Passport Act, that without prior sanction from the Central Government cognizance cannot be taken. Admittedly, the record shows that there is no prior sanction from the Central Government. In

1 2021 SCC online SC 3549

2 2024 SCC online TS 402

Crl.C.No.4904 of 2013, the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam, in paragraph No.4 observed as under :

“It seems that prior sanction of the Central Government has not been obtained in the matter for launching the prosecution against the petitioner. The offence under Section 12 of the Passport Act is the only offence alleged in the case. In such case, for want of sanction under Section 15 of the Act, the prosecution is not legally sustainable. On that ground alone, the prosecution proceedings are liable to be quashed. Matters being so, all further proceedings in C.C.No.599 of 2013 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-III Kottayam, as against the petitioner, based on Ann