CWP No.3212 of 2010.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.3212 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 25.08.2010 **** Anil Kumar Sharma . . . . Petitioner VS. Government of India & Others . . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner Dr. Anmol Rattan Sidhu, Asstt. Solicitor General with Mr. Karminder Singh, Advocate for UOI ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner challenges the order dated 31.12.2009 (Annexure P7), vide which he has been debarred from getting Passport for a period of 5 years. (2). The respondents have filed their reply/affidavit to which the petitioner has also filed his rejoinder. (3). Counsel for the parties have been heard and the records perused. (4). It appears that the petitioner was earlier granted Passport No.M-543830 on 09.02.1993 for a period of 10 years. The petitioner, who is stated to be a qualified Engineer, went USA on a Tourist Visa but CWP No.3212 of 2010.doc - 2 – overstayed and thereafter applied for ‘Political Asylum’ on the plea that his father was a Police Officer in Punjab who vigorously fought against terrorists due to which the petitioner and his entire family had an imminent threat to their lives in India. (5). Meanwhile, in USA the validity period of the petitioner’s Indian Passport also expired. He accordingly applied and was granted transit Passport by the Indian Embassy at USA which was valid for one year only. (6). The petitioner accordingly returned to India with the help of transit Passport and again applied for a fresh passport which has since been declined vide the impugned order. It may be mentioned here that the petitioner has been debarred from seeking passport for a period of five years on the ground that he sought ‘Political Asylum’ in USA. (7). Though from the averments made in the writ petition, it appears that the petitioner was misguided and duped by the travel/immigrant agents who kept on prompting him to indulge in one or the other illegal/irregular activities for the sake of his stay in USA. There can indeed be no doubt that the respondents would be well within CWP No.3212 of 2010.doc - 3 – their right in denying the Passport to a person whose activities are found to be detrimental and prejudicial to the integrity, sovereignty and security of country. (8). No such allegation, however, has been leveled by the respondents against the petitioner either in the impugned order or in their reply/affidavit. (9). The petitioner who is a qualified Engineer applied for the fresh passport so as to go abroad in search of green pasture. It will be too harsh to debar him from seeking fresh passport for a period of five years, especially when the ‘Political Asylum’ sought by him was due to threat of life at the hands of anti- national forces who were quite active in the State of Punjab at one point of time. (10). For the reasons afore-stated and taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, the writ petition is allowed in part to the extent that subject to the verification of other eligibility conditions which the respondents may hold, if so required, the period of 5 years for debarring the petitioner from seeking Passport is reduced to 2 years. (11). Ordered accordingly. (12). Dasti . CWP No.3212 of 2010.doc - 4 – (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 25.08.2010 vishal shonkar