Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Paruchuri Ashok Babu vs The Union Of India on 28 September, 2022
Author: R.Raghunandan Rao
Bench: R.Raghunandan Rao
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
WRIT PETITION No.30373 of 2022
ORDER:-
The petitioner is the holder of passport bearing No.H4355488, issued on 19.06.2009, had sought renewal of the said passport by way of an application bearing No.22- 1004688859 dated 30.04.2022, before the 3rd respondent- Passport Officer. As the said application was not being disposed of, the petitioner made enquiries and came to know that the renewal of the passport of the petitioner was being kept aside on the ground of two criminal cases were pending against the petitioner.
2. The petitioner being aggrieved by the refusal of the respondents to renewing the passport of the petitioner on the ground of the pending criminal cases had approached this Court, by way of the present writ petition.
3. Sri K.M.Krishna Reddy learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner contends that apart from the fact that the allegations are untrue, the refusal to grant renewal of the passport is not in accordance with the provisions of the Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act in as much as mere pendency of a 2 complaint filed against the petitioner is not sufficient to refuse renewal of the passport to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Pleader for Home submits written instructions, given by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Mangalagiri Rural Police Station. It is stated in the said written instructions that a criminal case bearing Crime No.651 of 2021 was registered against the petitioner and others under Sections 147, 148, 307, 332, 427, 323, 324 and 342 r/w 149 I.P.C and Sections 3(1) (r) (s) of SC & ST (POA) Act and the said investigation in the said crime is continuing. It appears that subsequently charges under Sections 307 I.P.C and 148 of I.P.C were dropped in the course of investigation.
5. As far as Criminal Investigation Department is concerned, Smt.Y.L.Siva Kalpana Reddy, learned standing counsel for respondent No.5 submits that the investigation against the petitioner in Crime No.2 of 2022 pending before the CID Police Station, Mangalagiri is under investigation.
6. The situation as on today is that no Court has taken cognizance on either of these cases.
7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in its Judgment dated 27.09.2021 in Crl.A.No.1342 of 2017 in the case of Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu vs. Central Bureau of 3 Investigation, after considering Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act had held that the passport authority cannot refuse renewal of the passport on the ground of pendency of a criminal appeal and directed the passport authority to renew the passport.
8. The issue and renewal of passports is regulated by the Passport Act, 1967. Section 6(2), extracted below, is relevant for this purpose.
(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:-
(a) that the applicant is not a citizen of India.,
(b) that the applicant may, or is likely to, engage outside India in activities prejudicial to the sovereignty and integrity of India.,
(c) that the departure of the applicant from India may, or is likely to, be detrimental to the security of India.,
(d) that the presence of the applicant outside India may, or is likely to, prejudice the friendly relations of India with any foreign country.,
(e) that the applicant has, at any time during the period of five years immediately preceding the date of his application, been convicted by a Court in India for any offence involving moral turpitude and sentenced in respect thereof to imprisonment for not less than two years.,
(f) that proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant are pending before a criminal court of India.,
(g) that a warrant or summons for the appearance, or a warrant for the arrest, of the applicant has been issued by a Court under any law for the time being in force or that 4 an order prohibiting the departure from India of the applicant has been made by any such court.,
(h) that the applicant has been repatriated and has not reimbursed the expenditure incurred in connection with such repatriation.,
(i) that in the opinion of the Central Government the issue of a passport or travel document to the applicant will not be in the public interest.
The grounds on which, the renewal of the passport of the petitioner is being refused could at best fall within Section 6 (2)
(f) of the Passport Act. This provision has been considered in various cases and the ambit of this provision is fairly settled.
9. A learned Single Judge of the High Court at Madras dated 04.02.2021 in W.P.No.20058 of 2020 held that mere pendency of a First Information Report cannot be the legal basis for denial of issuance of a regular passport to the petitioner and that it is only after cognizance is taken by an appropriate Court that it can be held that criminal proceedings have commenced and issuance or renewal of the passport would be depend on no objection being given by the concerned Court.
10. The Central Government has also issued G.S.R.No.570(E), dated 25.08.1993 stipulating that a no objection order would be required from a Court only if it falls within the ambit of Section 6(2)(f).
5
11. In view of the fact that Section 6(2)(f) would arise only when there is a pending proceeding before the Criminal Court after cognizance is taken, it would have to be held that as of now there is no pending criminal proceeding before the Court.
12. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents 1 to 3 to consider the application of the petitioner, for renewal of his passport, without raising any objection relating to the pendency of Crime No.651 of 2021 in 3rd respondent-Mangalagiri Rural Police Station and Crime No.2 of 2022 in 5th respondent-CID Police Station, Mangalagiri.
13. However, this order shall not preclude the 4th respondent-Mangalagiri Rural Police Station and 5th respondent- CID Police Station, Mangalagiri from taking such steps as are necessary to ensure the presence of the petitioner, for conduct of the investigation of the aforesaid crimes for any other purposes. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
___________________________________ JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO Date: 28.09.2022 RJS 6 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO WRIT PETITION No.30373 of 2022 Date : 28-09-2022 RJS