Harish v. The Regional Passport Officer
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 18.11.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI Harish ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Bharathi Ula Veethi, Race Course Road, Madurai - 625 002.
2.The Inspector of Police, Uchipuli Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.
... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to renew the petitioner's Passport in application in File No.1066252386324, based on his representation dated 12.04.2024. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Naresh Prabhu For 1st Respondent : Mr.B.Narayan Ram Central Government Standing Counsel For 2nd Respondent : Mr.K.Gnanasekaran Government Advocate (Crl)
ORDER
The prayer in the Writ Petition reads as follows:- "To issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st 1/5
respondent to renew the petitioner's Passport in application in File No.1066252386324 based on his representation dated 12.04.2024."
2.The petitioner has made an application for issuance of passport and the application Number is MD1066252386324. However, the first respondent without renewing the same, had sent a communication, requiring to provide a suitable explanation within 30 days for the adverse Police Verification Report received from Uchipuli Police Station in Crime Nos.15 of 2022, 299 of 2022, 2555 of 2022 and 323 of 2020 as against the petitioner. The petitioner has sent an explanation to the first respondent on 12.02.2024. However, no action was taken till date. Hence, the Writ Petition came to be filed.
3.When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the second respondent submitted that four cases are pending against the petitioner, among which, Crime No.299 of 2022 has been culminated in laying a charge sheet on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Ramanathapuram, but the same has not been taken on file. 4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent, the learned Government 2/5
Advocate appearing for the 2nd respondent and carefully perused the entire materials available on record.
5.The petitioner is given liberty to move the learned Trial Court for the relief now sought for. As and when such miscellaneous petition is filed, it shall be numbered and disposed of within a period of three weeks thereafter. The learned Trial Judge shall bear in mind that right to travel abroad is a fundamental right. The petitioner's career and avocation may be at stake if he is denied the right to go abroad. Therefore, the learned Trial Court unless there are extraordinary circumstances shall not deny relief. Of course, the period of validity of passport will have to be restricted. It is also open to the learned Trial Judge to stipulate appropriate conditions to ensure that the prosecution is not stalled on account of the petitioner's absence from India.
If necessary, the applicant can be directed to file an application under Section 228 of Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by executing a special vakalat. 6.Based on the order passed by the learned Trial Court, the petitioner shall move the jurisdictional Regional Passport Officer who shall dispose of the petition~mentioned application in terms of the said order.
3/5
7.With the above directions, this Writ Petition stands allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
18.11.2024 NCC : Yes / No Index :
Yes / No Internet :
Yes Mrn 4/5
L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
Mrn To 1.The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Bharathi Ula Veethi, Race Course Road, Madurai - 625 002.
2.The Inspector of Police, Uchipuli Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.
18.11.2024 5/5