Sri Rajshekhar Yalakki vs The Union Of India on 27 June, 2018

[Cites 5, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

Sri Rajshekhar Yalakki vs The Union Of India on 27 June, 2018

Bench: Aravind Kumar

                            1



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

         DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JUNE, 2018

                        BEFORE

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR

         WRIT PETITION NO.23736/2018 (GM-PP)


BETWEEN:

SRI RAJSHEKHAR YALAKKI
S/O SRI VEERABHADRAPPA
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
OCC: ENGINEER
RESIDING AT NO.5-3-11
G.K.ROAD, SAI BABA COLONY
SEDAM, KALBURGI - 585222
                                    ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI:R P SOMASHEKHARAIAH, ADV)


AND:

1.   THE UNION OF INDIA
     REP BY ITS SECRETARY
     MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
     SOUTH BLOCK
     NEW DELHI - 110001


2.   THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE
     PASSPORT SEVA KENDRA
     BENGALURU - 560002
     REP BY ITS REGIONAL OFFICER


3.   THE IMMIGRATION OFFICER
     IMMIGRATION AUTHORITY OF INDIA
     RAJIVE GANDHI INTERNATIONAL AIR PORT
                                   2



     SHAHABAD
     HYDERABAD - 500 003
                                               ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI:S R DODAWAD, ADV FOR
     SRI: C SHASHIKANTH, ADV FOR R1-R3)


     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT R-2 TO RENEW THE PASSPORT OF THE PETITIONER
BEARING F5408898 VIDE ANNEX-B AND C RESPECTIVELY.

     THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

                              ORDER

Though matter is listed for preliminary hearing, by the consent of learned Counsel appearing for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.

2. I have heard the arguments of Sri.R P Somashekaraiah, learned Counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri.S R Dodawad, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri C Shashikanth, for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Perused the records.

3. Petitioner is seeking for a direction to the respondent No.2 to renew the passport bearing No.F5408898 at Annexures-'B' and 'C' respectively issued to petitioner. 3 Perusal of the records would disclose, undisputedly, criminal proceedings for the offences punishable under Sections 498- A, 406 of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of DP Act are pending before the XIII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court, Hyderabad in Crime No.264/2013 against petitioner. It would also disclose that even on earlier occasion, petitioner had approached jurisdictional Magistrate for grant of permission to go abroad, which had been granted by the learned trial Judge by an order dated 17.08.2013 (Annexure 'D'), at which point of time, passport of the petitioner was valid and in force.

4. However, on account of prescribed period in the passport having expired, an application for renewal of passport has been sought for by petitioner. In view of pendency of criminal case, petitioner is required to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate for considering his application for renewal by respondent No.2, in the light of notification issued by the Ministry of External Affairs dated 25.08.1993, whereunder, it is specified that an applicant for grant or renewal of passport will have to fulfill the conditions prescribed thereunder.

5. The conditions stipulated in the said notification reads as under:-

"(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 courts 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 to 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 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, 5 then the passport shall be issued for the period of travel abroad specified in the order.

(a) 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 traveled 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;

(b) 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;

(c) 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."

6. In the light of aforestated conditions prescribed in the Circular issued by Ministry of External Affairs, it would suffice to reserve liberty to the petitioner to approach jurisdictional Magistrate to grant permission for renewal of passport, in view of the pendency of criminal case in Crime No.264/2013. Learned Jurisdictional Magistrate can take note of the fact, even on earlier occasion permission had been granted to the petitioner to travel abroad, while considering the application of petitioner that would be filed, expeditiously. Petitioner on obtaining orders from the jurisdictional Magistrate shall place the same before respondent No.2 for its consideration to renew the passport. Respondent No.2 would be at liberty to renew petitioner's passport for such period as it may deem fit and said exercise shall be undertaken by respondent No.2, expeditiously, at any rate, within two weeks from the date of petitioner submitting the order passed by the jurisdictional Court.

Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed of.

SD/-

JUDGE *bgn/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court