Mr Sumedha R Bhosekar vs Union Of India on 14 June, 2016

[Cites 4, Cited by 8]

Karnataka High Court

Mr Sumedha R Bhosekar vs Union Of India on 14 June, 2016

Equivalent citations: 2016 (3) AKR 412

Bench: S. Abdul Nazeer

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

            DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2016

                             BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER

           WRIT PETITION NO.57756/2015 (GM-PASS)

Between:

Mr.Sumedha R. Bhosekar,
S/o Ramesh V. Bhosekar,
Aged about 39 years,
R/a No.178, 5th Main,
JP Nagar 3rd Phase,
Bangalore - 78.                              .... Petitioner.

(By Sri C.K.Nandakumar, Adv.)

And:

Union of India,
Reptd. By Regional Passport Officer,
8th Block, 80 Feet Road,
Koramangala,
Bengaluru - 95.                              .... Respondent.

(By Krishna S. Dixit, ASG)

                                 ---

      This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of
the Constitution of India, praying to quash the endorsement
dated 1.12.2015 issued by the 1st respondent, etc.
                                2




       This Writ Petition coming on for Further Orders this
day, the Court passed the following:

                           ORDER

Petitioner had applied for renewal of passport, which was due to expire in March, 2016. At the time of police verification, it was found that a criminal case has been filed against him in C.C.No.17819/2013, which is pending before the II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru. Therefore, the respondent issued an endorsement at Annexure 'A' dated 1.12.2015 stating that since the case is pending, the petitioner has to take permission from the Court for renewal of the passport. Petitioner has called in question the validity of the said endorsement in this writ petition.

2. I have heard Sri C.K.Nandakumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Krishna S. Dixit, learned ASG for the respondent.

3. It is not in dispute that a criminal case has been registered against the petitioner on the basis of a complaint filed by his wife Mrs.Sunidhi S. Bhosekar in C.C.No.17819/2013 on the file of the II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.

4. A notification has been issued by the Ministry of External Affairs dated 25.8.1993 in exercise of the power conferred by clause (a) of Section 22 of the Passports Act, 1967, stipulating the conditions for issuance of the passport when criminal cases are pending against the applicant. It is as under:

"MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS NOTIFICATION New Delhi, the 25th August, 1993 GSR.570(E): In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of Section 22 of the Passports Act, 1967 (15 of 1967) and in supersession of notification of the Government 4 of India in the Ministry of External Affairs No.GSR.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 of 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 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;

(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 6 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 any time during the continuance in force of the passport so issued."

5. The aforesaid notification states that whenever an application is filed for issue of the passport in respect of a person against whom criminal cases are pending before the Criminal Courts in India, the passport shall be issued for the period specified in order of the Court referred to in the preamble of the notification and 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 of one year. It is thus clear that the Court in which the criminal case is pending has to pass an order for issue of the passport. 7

6. Therefore, the petitioner has to make suitable application before the Court in which the criminal case is pending against him. The Court has to consider the application and pass appropriate orders thereon. In the circumstances, question of quashing the endorsement at Annexure 'A' in this writ petition does not arise. Writ petition is disposed of with the above observations.

7. In view of the disposal of the writ petition as above, I.A.No.1/2016 does not survive for consideration. It is accordingly dismissed. No costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE.

BMM/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court