Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (2.32 seconds)Section 5 in The Passports Act, 1967 [Entire Act]
Deepak Dwarkasingh Chhabria vs Union Of India And Another on 8 August, 1996
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner also relied on the judgment
of the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) in A.Suresh Kumar Vs.
The Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office5, wherein the
Madras High Court placed reliance on the judgment of the Bombay
High Court in Deepak Dwarkasingh Chhabira Vs. Union of India
and another6, wherein it was held thus:
Section 3 in The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 4 in The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 506 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 6 in The Passports Act, 1967 [Entire Act]
The Passports Act, 1967
Section 205 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Maneka Gandhi vs Union Of India on 25 January, 1978
3. The Court below while dismissing the said applications has
referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Maneka
Gandhi Vs. Union of India and another1; judgment of High Court of
Chhattisgarh in Abhishek Tiwari Vs. Union of India2 and also the
judgment of the Allahabad High Court in Ravindra Nath Bhargav
Vs. State of U.P.3 and referred to the provisions of Sections 5 and 6
(2) (f) of Passport Act, 1967. The Court below dismissed the said
applications mainly on the ground that if the petitioner is permitted
to leave the country, his possibility of returning to India is almost
1
(1978) 1 SCC 248
2
2019 Supreme Chattisgarh High Court 919 = MANU/CG/1116/2019
3
2019 (2) ACR 1196
2
impossible. The Court below felt that the petitioner is not a law
abiding citizen and will not attend before the Court as and when
required for the reason that the mother and sister, who were shown
as A-2 and A-3, though residing in Viskhapatnam within the
jurisdiction of the Court, the prosecution could not serve summons
on them for the last two years. The Court below further observed
that the endeavour of the Court is to see the possibility of spouses for
reunion by way of conciliation, which is possible only when both
parties are present and accordingly, the Court below did not find any
merits in both the petitions and dismissed the same.