Delhi High Court - Orders
Siva Ram Krishna Mulpuru vs Cbi & Anr on 14 October, 2020
Author: Anup Jairam Bhambhani
Bench: Anup Jairam Bhambhani
via Video-conferencing
$~15
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL.) 1023/2020 & CRL. M.A. No. 8800/2020
SIVA RAM KRISHNA MULPURU .....Petitioner
Through : Mr. Kailash Pandey, Advocate.
versus
CBI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through : Mr. Rajinder Singh Cheema,
Senior Advocate with
Mr.Tarannum Cheema,
Advocate for R1/CBI.
Mr. Ajay Digpaul, CGSC for
R2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI
ORDER
% 14.10.2020 The petitioner is under investigation in RC No. 219/2012 E0015 dated 13.10.2012 registered under section 120B read with section 420 IPC and sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 at P.S. : CBI, Delhi.
2. Although by way of the present petition, the petitioner had sought various reliefs, during the course of proceedings Mr. Kailash Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has confined his prayer to seek only a direction to respondent No. 2/Regional Passport Office (RPO), Secunderabad, Telangana to issue to the petitioner a passport with a 10-year validity under rule 12(1) of the Passport Rules W.P.(CRL.) No. 1023/2020 Page 1 of 8 1980. The petitioner has dropped all other prayers, reserving liberty to canvass such prayers in other appropriate proceedings, as may be available to the petitioner in law.
3. Notice in this petition was issued on 07.07.2020.
4. Status report dated 24.07.2020 has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 1/CBI, enclosing therewith a copy of Office Memorandum dated 10.10.2019 issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, which pertains to issuance of passports to persons against whom criminal cases are pending before courts of law in India.
5. Response dated 27.07.2020 has been filed by the petitioner to the aforesaid status report dated 24.07.2020, enclosing copies of certain orders passed by the Madras High Court and the Punjab & Haryana High Court.
6. A short affidavit dated 14.08.2020 has also been filed on behalf of respondent No. 2/RPO, Secunderabad, enclosing a copy of Gazette Notification dated 25.08.1983 issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, which sets-out the exemptions available to citizens of India against whom proceedings are pending before criminal courts, from the operation of the provisions of section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act 1967, if they produce orders from the concerned courts permitting them to depart from India. Certain other documents have also been filed with this affidavit.
7. Under cover of index dated 01.10.2020, the petitioner has also filed a copy of Public Advisory dated 23.12.2014 issued by the W.P.(CRL.) No. 1023/2020 Page 2 of 8 Ministry of External Affairs inter-alia relating to Indian citizens travelling abroad on a passport that expires in less than 06 months.
8. Mr. Pandey has argued that investigation in the subject RC has been carrying-on since 2013; that no summons have so-far been issued to the petitioner by the CBI; nor has any charge-sheet been filed against him till date; and yet the petitioner's passport is renewed only for one year at a time, thereby causing him immense hardship, since he is unable to travel abroad for longer periods.
9. As clarified by Mr. R.S. Cheema, learned senior counsel appearing for the CBI, insofar as the petitioner's existing passport is concerned, the custody of the same is with the RPO, Hyderabad/Secunderabad as recorded inter-alia in surrender certificate dated 27.01.2020 issued by the RPO, confirming that the passport has been so surrendered.
10. In essence and substance, Mr. Pandey's submission is that since the petitioner has not even been summonsed by the CBI so far, nor has any charge-sheet been filed against him in all of 07 years, there is no reason why the petitioner should not be granted a passport with the usual 10-year validity, merely because a so-called investigation is still going-on.
11. Mr. Pandey has drawn attention to Public Advisory dated 23.12.2014 in which the Ministry itself inter-alia says :
"(ii) PASSPORTS VALID FOR LESS THAN SIX MONTHS Many international travellers may not realise that having an unexpired passport is sometimes not enough to obtain Visas or to enter certain foreign countries. Indian citizens travelling on Passports which may expire in less than six months should renew their passports before any upcoming international travel. It is especially important to check the W.P.(CRL.) No. 1023/2020 Page 3 of 8 passports needs of any minor who may be accompanying their parents as passports for minors have a shorter validity period (5 years) than passports for adults (10 years). The universal practice in vogue now is;
"Once your passport crosses the nine-year mark, it is time to get new passport."
12. On the other hand, Mr. Cheema submits that the reason that investigation in the subject RC has been carrying-on for so long is that it involves trans-national transactions, for which letters rogatory have been issued to various countries, response to which is still awaited. Mr. Cheema submits that moreover, the CBI does not decide the validity period of the passport issued to the petitioner; since that is the prerogative of the RPO/Ministry of External Affairs.
13. Mr. Ajay Digpaul, learned CGSC appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2/RPO submits that the petitioner has been granted only one-year renewals at a time in compliance of Office Memorandum dated 10.10.2019, which in fact exempts Indian citizens with pending criminal cases to a certain extent from the statutory bar contained in section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act 1967.
14. Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act 1967 reads as under :
"6. Refusal of passports, travel documents, etc. -
(1) xxxxx (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) xxxxx
(f) that proceedings in respect of any offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant are pending before a criminal court in India;
xxxxx "
(emphasis supplied)
W.P.(CRL.) No. 1023/2020 Page 4 of 8
The relevant portion of Office Memorandum dated 10.10.2019 reads as under:
"2. GSR 570(E) dated 25.08.1993 is reproduced below for reference:
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 the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of External Affairs No. GSR 298(E) dated the 14th April 1967, 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;
(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 given 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."
(emphasis supplied) W.P.(CRL.) No. 1023/2020 Page 5 of 8
15. It has further been submitted on behalf of the RPO that the petitioner had applied for re-issuance/renewal of his passport on 20.12.2019 based upon order dated 15.11.2019 made by this court in W.P.(C) No. 2879/2019, whereby the RPO had been directed to renew the petitioner's passport as per rules. Furthermore, it is stated that the petitioner had also furnished an undertaking as prescribed by Notification G.S.R.570(E) dated 25.08.1993 along with a request dated 24.01.2020, wherein the petitioner had requested for renewal and safekeeping of his passport with the RPO, Hyderabad.
16. It is further pointed-out that vidé order dated 04.04.2014 made in Crl. Rev. Petition No. 212/2014, this court had directed the RPO to release the petitioner's passport upon his producing a bank guarantee of Rs.50 lacs in the name of the RPO and also submitting his itinerary and an undertaking that the passport would be returned to the RPO once he was back.
17. The CBI and the RPO submit that it is in the foregoing circumstances that the petitioner's passport has been renewed only with a 1-year validity from time-to-time and has been retained for safekeeping with the RPO, Hyderabad until now.
18. Upon an overall view of the matter however, both Mr. Cheema, learned senior counsel appearing for the CBI as well as Mr. Digpaul, learned CGSC appearing for the RPO submit, that though the investigation is still on-going, since the petitioner is not required to be arrested and no 'proceeding' is 'pending' before a criminal court in the strict legal sense, both respondents have no serious opposition if the petition is allowed to the limited extent that the petitioner's W.P.(CRL.) No. 1023/2020 Page 6 of 8 passport may now be renewed for the usual 10-year period, to obviate any difficulties and inconvenience that he is facing in international travel.
19. Although the petitioner's existing passport is valid until 26.01.2021, counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the aforesaid Public Advisory, he has already applied for issuance of a fresh passport vidé application dated 01.10.2020, which may now be processed in light of the no-objection expressed by the respondents.
20. Accordingly, in view of the submissions made by the parties and noting that the CBI and the RPO have not opposed the issuance of a passport with a 10-year validity to the petitioner, without delving further into the merits or the applicability of the prohibition contained in section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act and the exemption available under O.M. dated 10.10.2019; nor delving into the question of whether any criminal proceedings are 'pending' against the petitioner at this stage, the present petition is disposed of with a short direction to respondent No. 2 to grant to the petitioner a passport valid for the usual 10-year period from the date of its issuance, subject of course to compliance with other applicable rules and regulations, but without considering the pendency of investigation in RC No. 219/2012 E0015 as an impediment.
21. It is however made clear that this order does not in any manner vary the conditions imposed upon the petitioner for travelling abroad vidé order dated 04.04.2014 made in Crl. Rev. P. No. 212/2014.
22. Mr. Pandey submits that since he has not pressed the prayers for correction of his date of birth and for the release of the petitioner's W.P.(CRL.) No. 1023/2020 Page 7 of 8 passport to him instead of retaining it in the RPO's custody, the petitioner seeks to reserve liberty to file appropriate proceedings seeking these reliefs subsequently. Liberty as prayed for, is granted.
23. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.
24. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J.
OCTOBER 14, 2020 j/Ne W.P.(CRL.) No. 1023/2020 Page 8 of 8