IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 11TH APRIL 2011 / 21ST CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 10727 of 2011(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- TOMY THATTARUPARAMBIL JOSEPH, AGED 57 YEARS, S/O. THATTARUPARAMBIL CHEEKU, JOSEPH, THATTARUPARAMBIL HOUSE, PUTHUVYPE P.O., ERNAKULAM, KERALA-682 508. BY ADV. SRI.SHAIJAN C.GEORGE SRI.JOHN VIPIN SMT.S.REKHA KUMARI SRI.ABHISHEK KURIAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI. 2. REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, COCHIN. 3. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, (RURAL), ALUVA. ADV. SRI.T.SANJAY, CGC FOR R1,2 GP SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J ....................... W.P.(C).10727/2011 ....................... Dated this the 11th day of April, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging the course and proceedings being pursued by the respondents, in not considering the request for issuance of a provisional passport, so as to go abroad along with his wife, in connection with the proposed delivery of the daughter-in-law. 2. Going by the pleadings on record, it is seen that there was some civil dispute between the petitioner and a lady by name “Lilly”. The civil suit filed by the petitioner against her as O.S.22/04 before the Sub Court, Kochi, was decreed in favour of the petitioner which, however, is under challenge in appeal. The defendant in the Suit filed a complaint before the police, leading to registration of FIR as Crime No.184/04 of Narakkal Police Station and after investigation, the police found that it was a frivolous litigation and accordingly it was referred; which made the defendant to prefer a 'private complaint' before the Judicial 1st Class Magistrate's Court-I, Kochi, as C.C.No.800/07. It is with reference to the said W.P.(C).10727/11 2 case, that issuance of the passport has been denied to the petitioner, which made him to approach this Court by filing the present writ petition. 3. Heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2, as well as the learned Government Pleader appearing for the third respondent. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the defendant, who preferred the complaint before the Magistrate's Court against the petitioner, has also approached this Court by filing Crl.M.C.No.596/2011 and the proceedings now stands stayed by virtue of an interim order passed by this Court on 24.2.2011 in Crl.M.A.1184/2011. It is also pointed out that the actual dispute between the petitioner and the said lady by name “Lily” is actually of a civil nature and that the same cannot be a reason for denying issuance of passport in favour of the petitioner. W.P.(C).10727/11 3 5. After considering the facts and circumstances, this Court finds that the petitioner's application for issuance of a provisional passport shall be considered and appropriate orders shall be passed by the second respondent forthwith. Pendency of C.C.800/2007 before the Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Kochi, shall not be treated as a bar in this regard if the application is otherwise in order and if there is no other criminal case pending against the petitioner. Such orders shall be passed de hors Ext.P3, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 'two weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. However, it is made clear that, before proceeding to go abroad, petitioner shall get necessary clearance from the concerned Magistrate's Court and the interim stay of the trial in C.C.No.800/07 will not be a bar for the learned Magistrate to consider such application for clearance to go abroad as aforesaid. Writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, Judge mrcs