IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 2054 of 2007 Date of Decision: April 23, 2008 Kuldip Singh …Petitioner Versus Union of India and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Dr. Anmol Rattan Sidhu, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Vishal Deep Goyal, Advocate, for the petitioner. M.M. KUMAR, J. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for quashing order dated 13.10.2006 (P-7), passed by the Regional Passport Officer, Jalandhar-respondent No. 3, rejecting the application of the petitioner for grant of passport against the lost one, further deciding not to issue passport to him for a period of five years from the date of his deportation. Order dated 10.1.2007 (P-10), passed by the Chief Passport Officer, New Delhi-respondent No. 2, rejecting the appeal of the petitioner has also been challenged. A further prayer has been made for directing the respondents to issue C.W.P. No. 2054 of 2007 passport to the petitioner without imposing the ban of five years after the date of his deportation. Brief facts of the case are that in the year 1993, Passport No. Q-283812 was issued to the petitioner which was valid upto 2003. During the period from 12.2.1994 to 2.11.2005, the petitioner visited various countries on tourist visa, which include Sofia and Greece. It is claimed that he illegally entered into the United Kingdom and developed relations with one Ms Fozia Mehsom. For solemnization of their marriage, the petitioner was issued Emergency Certificate No. 847038, dated 30.10.2005. On 2.11.2005, the petitioner reached India by taking flight from London to New Delhi and got married in his native village on 10.11.2006. In order to regularise/revalidate/renew his passport, on 13.2.2006, the petitioner applied for issuance of passport with the Passport Office, Jalandhar (P-4). Respondent No. 3 directed the petitioner to furnish his affidavits. From the affidavits furnished by the petitioner on 1.4.2006 and 13.4.2006, it has been discovered that the petitioner had applied for political asylum at United Kingdom on the ground that he has well-founded fear of prosecution in India. However, the request of the petitioner was declined by the Asylum Directorate, Team 6, Immigration and Nationality Directorate, Lunar House 40 Wellesley Road, Crydon CR9 2BY, vide order dated 31.7.1998 (P-15). On 13.10.2006, the application of the petitioner for issuance of passport has been rejected by respondent No. 3 by holding as under:- 2 C.W.P. No. 2054 of 2007 “ In this behalf, we have to inform you that at the time when you made application for passport in year 1992 and obtained Passport No. Q-283812, you had made declaration that “I owe allegiance to the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India and have not voluntarily acquired citizenship or travel of any other country. I have not lost, surrendered or been deprived of citizenship of India.” Now on consideration of application dt. 13.02.2006 and affidavits dt. 01.04.2006 submitted by you in support of application for passport, it has been revealed that you had sought political asylum in U.K. and was refused, you had to travel back to India on Emergency certificate of dt. 31.10.2005, that by doing so, you acted against the letter and spirit of the aforesaid declaration. Therefore, in terms of declaration dt. 13.02.2006 contains in the present application, signed by you on dt. 13.02.2006 and declaration signed at the foot of the aforesaid affidavit to the effect that Govt. is at liberty to take any legal action under the Passport Act, 1967 and in terms of provisions of the Passport Act, 1967, we have decided, not to issue you passport for a period of five years from the date of your deportation. 3 C.W.P. No. 2054 of 2007 “However, we may advise you that in case you do not feel satisfied with the aforesaid decision, you may approach the competent court.” Thereafter on 27.12.2006, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Chief Passport Officer for grant of passport facilities, which has been rejected vide order dated 10.1.2007 (P-1). After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the paper book we are of the considered view that there is no merit in the instant petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. As is clear from the documents placed on record by the petitioner himself, it is clear that he had applied for grant of political asylum to him after reaching United Kingdom. Making of such a petition clearly depict that the petitioner was indulging in activities which were prejudicial to the sovereignty and integrity of India and, therefore, seeking refuge permanently in United Kingdom. Once his request was declined, he had no other option but to be sent back to India and for that purpose, he was issued an Emergency Certificate dated 30.10.2005. In his application dated 13.2.2006 for grant of passport facility after his return from United Kingdom, at the end a declaration is made by him that he owes allegiance to the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India. Once the petitioner had already expressed his displeasure/annoyance against the Indian administration, he cannot now claim that he owes allegiance to the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India. Under these circumstances, 4 C.W.P. No. 2054 of 2007 the respondents are justified in refusing passport facility to the petitioner. In view of above, no case is made out for the grant of any relief to the petitioner. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (SABINA) April 23, 2008 JUDGE Pkapoor 5