Passport case order/THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

Sekar Reporter

5 months ago

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 29.04.2024

CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

                   W.P. No.11618 of 2024

R.Thamizharasan … Petitioner

Vs.

The Authorised Officer,
Regional Passport Office,
Chennai Royal Towers, No.2 and 3,
4th Floor, New NO.158,
Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.
The Inspector of Police,
Mangalampet P.S,
Mangalampet,
Cuddalore District. … Respondents
Prayer:Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, for issuance of writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1st respondent to issue the passport in Application No.MA4065957554923 on 09.11.2023.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Manikandan For R1 : Mrs.R.Durgarani CGSC For R2 : Mr.S.Vinothkumar Government Advocate (Crl.side) O R D E R The writ of mandamus has been instituted to direct the 1st respondent to issue the passport in Application No. No.MA4065957554923 on 09.11.2023.
1. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is an accused in a criminal case in Crime No.370 of 2021 registered under Sections 3(2)(va), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(r) of the of the SC & ST Act. The counter criminal case has been registered in Crime No.371 of 2022 under Sections 294(b), 323, 355 IPC & Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) & 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of atrocities) Amendment Act 2015.
2. Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing on behalf of the 2nd respondent would submit that a charge sheet has already been filed before the competent criminal court of law. The case is pending for trial in S.C.No.14 of 2022 on the file of Special Court for SC/ST cases, Cuddalore.
3. Mr.K.Manikandan, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that the other accused has filed Crl.O.P.No.7683 of 2023 and the High Court has granted an interim stay of further proceedings. Since an interim stay has been granted, the 1st respondent herein has to issue the Passport to the petitioner.
4. Mr.Vinoth Kumar, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) brought to the notice of this Court that many applications seeking issuance of Passport have been filed by furnishing false informations and suppressing the material informations regarding registration of Criminal Case. If the Regional Passport Office found that the material informations are suppressed or false informations are provided, then such applicants are liable to be prosecuted under Section 12(b) of the Passport Act, 1967.
5. Punishment prescribed under Section 12(e) is “Imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees or with both”. Therefore, the applicants seeking Passport must furnish all the material informations truly and correctly and in the event of identifying any false informations or material informations, the Regional Passport Officers are directed to prosecute those persons by following the due process.
6. In respect of the grievances to travel abroad, the person against whom the Criminal Cases are pending has to approach the jurisdictional Criminal Court by filing an appropriate application. However, writ petition is not entertainable for the purpose of grant of permission to travel abroad or to issue Passport during the pendency of the Criminal case in India.
7. In the present case, the petitioner is aged about 22 years. Therefore, his idea may be to secure the Passport during pendency of criminal case for the purpose of traveling abroad. The petitioner in his affidavit stated that he has applied for passport to work in abroad, by submitting all proofs and documents. Therefore, it is amply clear that the petitioner has taken a decision to travel abroad during the pendency of the criminal case.
8. The practice of filing a writ petition during the pendency of the criminal case for the purpose of securing the passport to travel abroad, if permitted would hamper the criminal proceedings. The criminal court may not be in a position to proceed with the trial or grant of relief would lead to destroy the prosecution in establishing the offence before the criminal court of law.
9. Section 6 (2) (f) of the Passport Act 1967 enumerates that “Proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant are pending before the criminal court in India” is a ground to refuse passport.
10. Mr.Prasad Vijayakumar, learned Counsel brought to the notice of this Court that Ministry of External Affairs issued a notification dated 25.08.1993 in G.S.R.570(E) and the same is extracted hereunder:
  “In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of Section 22 of the Passport Act 1967 (15 of 1967) and in Supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of External Affairs No.G.S.R.298 (E), dated the 14th April, 1976, the Central Government, being of the opinion that it is necessary in public interest to do so, hereby exempts citizens of India against whom proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by them are pending before a criminal court in India and who produce orders from the court concerned permitting them to depart from India, from the operation of the provisions of Clause (f) of sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the said Act, subject to the following conditions, namely:-
  (a) the passport to be issued to every such citizen shall be issued –
  (i) for the period specified in order of the court referred to above, if the Court specifies a period for which the passport has to be issued; or
  (ii) if no period either for the issue of the passport or for the travel abroad is specified in such order, the passport shall be issued for a period one year;
  (iii) if such order gives permission to travel abroad for a period less than one year, but does not specify the period validity of the passport, the passport shall be issued for one year; or
  (iv) if such order gives permission to travel abroad for a period exceeding one year and does not specify the validity of the passport, then the passport shall be issued for the period of travel abroad specified in the order.
  (b) any passport issued in terms of (a) (ii) and (a) (iii) above can be further renewed for one year at a time, provided the applicant has not travelled abroad for the period sanctioned by the court; and provided further that, in the meantime, the order of the court is not cancelled or modified;
  (c) any passport issued in terms of (a) (i) above can be further renewed only on the basis of a fresh court order specifying a further period of validity of the passport or specifying a period for travel abroad;
  (d) the said citizen shall give an undertaking in writing to the passport issuing authority that he shall, if required by the court concerned, appear before it at any time during the continuance in force of the passport so issued.”
11. When the issuance of passport during the pendency of the criminal proceedings has been required, a person seeking issuance or re-issuance of passport during the pendency of the criminal case has to approach the jurisdictional criminal court necessarily for seeking permission to travel abroad. The court concerned may consider the notification issued by the Ministry of External Affairs while granting permission to such accused persons to travel abroad.
12. In the present case, a criminal case is pending. Interim stay granted in the Crl.O.P. No.7683 of 2023 is not a ground to seek an order to issue passport in the present writ petition. Admittedly, the Crl.O.P. is pending and charge sheet has already been filed in the criminal case by the Police. Therefore, for all purposes, it is to be construed that a criminal case is pending for trial and the petitioner is at liberty to participate in the trial and subject to final outcome, he is at liberty to approach the Regional Passport Office to consider his application by following the due process. Contrarily, he cannot secure passport during the pendency of a criminal case and such an attempt cannot be considered by this Court.
13. Thus, the Writ Petition is devoid of merits and stands dismissed at the admission stage itself. No costs.
  29.04.2024
  Index : Yes/No
  Speaking Order : Yes/No
  Neutral Citation : Yes/No
  veda

The Authorised Officer,
Regional Passport Office,
Chennai Royal Towers, No.2 and 3,
4th Floor, New NO.158,
Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.
The Inspector of Police,
Mangalampet P.S,
Mangalampet,
Cuddalore District.

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.

veda

            W.P. No.11618 of 2024

29.04.2024