IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2009 / 20TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 21589 of 2009(P) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- ABDUL AZEEZ ANIL, S/O.ABDUL AZEEZ, AGED 47 YEARS, SHEEBA MANZIL, MANCHADIMOODU, CHIRAYINKIL P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, (HOLDER OF PASS PORT NO.F.1515529). BY ADVS. MR.SHOBY K.FRANCIS, MR.M.A.MOOSA KUNJU. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. REGIONAL PASS PORT OFFICER, PASSPORT OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. IMMIGRATION OFFICER, BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, CSI-AIRPORT, MUMBAI-9. 3. SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUSEUM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHIRAYINKIL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.T.SANJAY, CGC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 21589 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 11th August,2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the holder of an Indian Passport, as evidenced by Ext.P1. According to him, he lost the said passport when he was traveling in a K.S.R.T.C Bus from Vellayamabalam to Museum in Trivandrum in the year 2007. He lodged a complaint before the 3rd respondent and Crime No.227/2007 was registered in the Museum police station. 2. It seems that the petitioner applied for a fresh passport in the year 2007 itself. Police verification was conducted and then it was revealed that the petitioner is an accused in CC No. 478/2006 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Attingal. It further seems that the said calendar case was registered under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Thereafter, the petitioner had retrieved his lost passport, but it was not brought to the notice of the Passport Officer. The original passport of the petitioner was impounded by the W.P ( C) No. 21589 of 2009 2 Emigration Officials in Mumbai when the petitioner was attempting to travel from Mumbai to Saudi Arabia. Petitioner approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to release his passport. 3. A statement has been filed on behalf of the 1st respondent. Paragraphs 6 and 7 of the statement read as follows: “6. When a complaint of lost passport is made, the same is viewed seriously and an all out effort is made to ensure that the same is not misused by anybody. The lookout notice will ensure that all exit points from the Country are kept on alert from that day onwards to watch out for the missing passport. After being on the updated computerised system of the immigration authorities as well of that of the security agencies from 2005, the passport was finally seized by the 2nd respondent while the petitioner was attempting to travel from Mumbai to Saudi. 7. It is humbly submitted that once a passport is reported lost and since retrieved, the same cannot be utilised for travel abroad as there is no provision to cancel the entry (DRIL) on the computer systems across the country. The proper procedure is to apply for a fresh booklet along with the retrieved passport, which would be then cancelled and returned to holder along with the fresh passport. This W.P ( C) No. 21589 of 2009 3 can be done only if the petitioner applies for a fresh passport by producing proof of disposal of the criminal cases if any against him. The retrieved passport cannot be utilised any more.” 4. The only course of action now available to the petitioner is to seek a fresh passport. Accordingly, if the petitioner applies for a fresh passport within two weeks, a decision shall be taken thereon, in accordance with law, within one month from the date of receipt of the application. If the petitioner applies for a 'talkal' passport, the same shall also be dealt with in accordance with the regulations governing the same. Writ petition is disposed of as above. (V.GIRI,JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 21589 of 2009 4 W.P ( C) No. 21589 of 2009 5