Madras High Court
M.Thennarasu vs The Regional Passport Officer on 22 January, 2024
Author: V. Bhavani Subbaroyan
Bench: V.Bhavani Subbaroyan
W.P(MD)No.1016 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 22.01.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
W.P(MD) No.1016 of 2024
M.Thennarasu ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Regional Passport Officer,
Regional Passport Office,
Bharathi Ula Street,
Race Course Colony,
Madurai – 625 002.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Thiruppuvanam Police Station,
Sivagangai District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to
call for the records of the first respondent's impugned communication
No.SCN/311999501/22 dated 06.01.2022 and quash the same and
consequently direct the first respondent to issue passport to the petitioner
by considering the petitioner's application No.MD1063845660921 dated
29.12.2021 and for other reliefs within a period stipulated by this Court.
1 / 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.1016 of 2024
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Atham Ali
For R1 : Mr.Ashok Kumar Ram
For R2 : M/s.M.Aasha
Government Advocate (Crl.side)
ORDER
The Petitioner has prayed for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the first respondent's impugned communication No.SCN/311999501/22 dated 06.01.2022 and quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent to issue passport to the petitioner by considering the petitioner's application No. MD1063845660921 dated 29.12.2021 and for other reliefs within a period stipulated by this Court.
2. Heard Mr.S.Atham Ali, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.Ashok Kumar Ram, learned Counsel appearing for the first respondent and Mrs.M.Aasha, learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the second respondent.
2 / 16https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.1016 of 2024
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that due to some motive, the petitioner has been implicated as an accused in Cr.No. 296 of 2019 for the offences under Sections 147, 294(b), 323 of IPC, on the file of the Thiruppuvanam Police Station and as on date, no charge sheet has been filed. In the meantime, in order to pursue the job in the abroad, the petitioner applied for passport in application No. MD1063845660921 on 29.12.2021. After scrutinizing the application, it was brought to the notice of the first respondent that he was involved in the criminal case and hence, his application was rejected on 06.01.2022.
The first respondent issued a letter in SCN/311999501/2022 stating that he had suppressed the registration of case registered against him in Crime No.296 of 2019, on the file of the second respondent and directed the petitioner to give an explanation regarding the said criminal case. Based on that, the petitioner has submitted an explanation to the first respondent stating that the case registered as against him as a false one and the maximum punishment for the alleged offences is 3 years and even after receipt of his explanation, the first respondent has not pass any orders in his application. Being left with no other alternative efficacious remedy, the petitioner constrained to file this writ petition before this Court.
3 / 16https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.1016 of 2024
4.The learned Assistant Solicitor General of India appearing for the first respondent would submit that the first respondent has issued show cause notice on 29.12.2021 to the petitioner directing him to furnish his explanation regarding the circumstances under which he suppressed the material information of criminal case pending against him in his passport application. Further, the first respondent could not proceed with the issuance of passport on the ground that FIR has been registered against the Petitioner in Crime No.296 of 2019 under Sections 147, 294(b), 323 of IPC and the charge sheet has also been filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thiruppuvanam on 20.01.2024 through e-filing in CNR No.2022000255-2C20240060.
5.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side)appearing for the second respondent Police would submit that except this case, no other criminal case is pending against the petitioner and in this case charge sheet has also been filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thiruppuvanam. The Petitioner is under criminal investigation and only after the completion of trial, the first respondent can decide the issue and pass appropriate orders.
4 / 16https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.1016 of 2024
6. This Court had an occasion to deal with a similar issue in W.P. (MD) No.7056 of 2017 in the case of N.Chandrababu vs. the Sub Inspector of Police and another. The relevant portions in the order dated 21.04.2017 are extracted hereunder:
“3)..... At this juncture, it may be relevant to discuss the legal position with regard to the right of a person facing criminal prosecution to demand issuance of passport. To decide this issue, it may be necessary to extract the following legal provisions from the Passports Act, 1967.
'Section 5(2) of the Passports Act, 1967 On receipt of an application under this section, the passport authority, after making such inquiry, if any, as it may consider necessary, shall, subject to the other provisions of this Act, by order in writing,-
(a) issue the passport or travel document with endorsement, or,as the case may be, make on the passport or travel document the endorsement, in respect of the foreign countries specified in the application; or 5 / 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.1016 of 2024
(b) issue the passport or travel document with endorsement, or,as the case may be, make on the passport or travel document the endorsement, in respect of one or more of the foreign countries specified in the application and refuse to make an endorsement in respect of the other country or countries ; or
(c) refuse to issue the passport or travel document or, as the case may be, refuse to make on the passport or travel document any endorsement.
Section 6(2) of the Passports Act, 1967.
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, an on no other ground,
(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 6 / 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.1016 of 2024 outside India may, or is likely to, prejudice the friendly relations of India with any foreign country;
(e) that the applicant has, at an 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 in 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 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.
4) For deciding the issue at hand, Section 6(2)(f) will be relevant. A reading of the said 7 / 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.1016 of 2024 provisions shows that the power of the Passport Authority to refuse issuance of passport under Section 5(2)(c) is governed by Section 6(2). Thus, for any of the reasons given in Clause (a) to (i) of Section 6(2), the Passport Authorities can refuse to issue a passport in exercise of power under Section 5(2)(c). The Parliament, in its wisdom, has conferred the aforesaid power, which is administrative in nature, on the Passport Authority. The Central Government has issued the following Notification dated 25.08.1993, for regulating the exercise of power by the Passport Authority under Section 6(2 (f):
“In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of Section 22 of the Passports 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:-8 / 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.1016 of 2024
(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;9 / 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.1016 of 2024
(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.
5. From a reading of the aforesaid Notification, in the opinion of this Court, the expression 'concerned Court' will mean the Court before whom the person is facing the prosecution. In this case, had there not been a quash petition pending, the 'concerned Court' would be the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Trichy before whom the petitioner is facing trial in C.C.No.21 of 2015. However, this Court, in exercise of its power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., has admitted Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3533 of 2017 and has granted stay of all further proceedings in C.C.No. 21 of 2015 on the file of Judicial Magistrate No.V, Trichy. Under such circumstances, the expression 'concerned Court' in the context of the present case will mean the High Court and not the Judicial Magistrate No.V, Trichy.”
7. This Court also had another occasion to consider the same issue in Crl.O.P(MD) No.5068 of 2018 in Noushad Thazhaith vs. State, rep.by the Deputy Superintendent of Police and another. The relevant portions of the order are extracted hereunder:
10 / 16https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.1016 of 2024 "The petitioner is facing trial in PRC No.2 of 2013 before the Judicial Magistrate No.III, Coimbatore for the offences under Section 4
(a) and 6 r/w 4(G) of the Explosive Substance Act, 1908. The petitioner has filed a quash application in Crl.O.P.No.3532 of 2018 challenging the prosecution and the same is pending before this Court. The petitioner is the holder of Indian Passport bearing No. H5939876 issued at Kozhikode, Kerala on 09.09.2009 valid upto 08.09.2019.
2.It is the case of the petitioner that he has business interest in the Middle East and that he has been going abroad frequently on valid visa. It is his further case that the pages in his passport got exhausted and therefore, when he applied for a fresh passport, the Passport Authorities directed him to obtain necessary permission under Section 6(2)(f) r/w Section 22 of the Passports Act r/w Notification No. GSR 570 E dated 25.08.1993. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present application for permission.
3.Heard Mr.N.Manokaran, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.C.Raghavan for the respondent Police and Mr.N.Vijaya Baskar for 2nd respondent Passport Authorities.
4.Under normal circumstances, in a case of this nature, this Court would not grant permission for the petitioner to go abroad. However, it is seen that this petitioner has been granted permission earlier by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Coimbatore vide order dated 03.11.2015 in CMP.No.4280/2015 and by this Court in 11 / 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.1016 of 2024 Crl.O.P.No.22055/2016 dated 10.02.2017. The learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Coimbatore in his order dated 03.11.2015 has noted that the petitioner has been appearing regularly before the Court from 2013 onwards and because of the failure of the prosecution to summon the co-accused, the Magistrate has not been able to commit the case to the Court of Sessions. Only this aspect has weighed in the mind of this Court for positively considering the request of the petitioner. The law with regard to grant of permission for renewal of passport has been settled by this Court in N.Chandrababu vs. Sub Inspector of Police Palakkarai Police Station, Trichy [2017 (3) CTC 493] and it may not be necessary to recapitulate the legal propositions.
5.Suffice it to say that, when a criminal case is pending before a Court, passport can be issued or renewed only on the basis of production of orders from the concerned Court permitting the applicant to depart from India. In notification NOGSR 570 B, the conditions under which a passport or travel documents could be issued has been enumerated. Taking into consideration the earlier conduct of the petitioner, as noted by the Judicial Magistrate No.III in his order dated 03.11.2015, this Court grants permission to the petitioner to depart from India and return within a period of eight months from the date of this order. Exemption is granted to the petitioner from the operations of the provisions of Clause (f) sub section (2) of section 6 of the Passports Act, for a period of eight months from the date of this order. The petitioner shall abide 12 / 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.1016 of 2024 by the conditions set out in the notification dated 25.08.1993”.
The above order was also followed in the subsequent order passed in Crl.O.P.No.7220 of 2019 dated 07.06.2019.
8.The Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, has issued a statutory notification in GSR.570(E) dated 25.08.1993 with certain guidelines by providing relief to those applicants against whom criminal proceedings are pending before the Courts that they can obtain the passport by obtaining No Objection Certificate from the concerned Court and also by filing an undertaking as prescribed in the notification.
9. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to dispose the Writ Petition with the following directions:-
(a)The Petitioner has to approach the concerned Court where the case is pending, seeking for permission to go abroad and for issuance of appropriate passport;
(b)Suffice it to say that, when a criminal case is pending before a Court, passport can be issued or 13 / 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.1016 of 2024 renewed only on the basis of production of orders from the concerned Court permitting the applicant to depart from India;
(c)On such issuance/renewal, the petitioner shall come over to India and take immediate steps to participate in the criminal proceedings and work out his remedy and defend himself in the case;
(d) The petitioner shall also file a memo before the concerned Court, where the criminal case is pending and bring to the notice of the said Court, the orders passed in this writ petition.
10.With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.
No costs.
22.01.2024 NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No Internet : Yes/ No pnn 14 / 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.1016 of 2024 To
1.The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Bharathi Ula Street, Race Course Colony, Madurai – 625 002.
2.The Inspector of Police, Thiruppuvanam Police Station, Sivagangai District. .
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
15 / 16https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.1016 of 2024 V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J.
pnn Order made in W.P(MD) No.1016 of 2024 Dated 22.01.2024 16 / 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis