IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 28TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 3406 of 2008(E) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- BHASI SURESH KUMAR @ SATHEESAN JANAKI, QUSAIS DEIRA, DUBAI, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER AND FATHER SRI.BHASI, AGED 67 YEARS, S/O.MADHAVAN, RESIDING AT KOZHYOTTU MADAM, KOONTHALLOOR VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZHU POST, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADVS. MR.B.JAYASURYA, MR.J.JAYAKUMAR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE CHIEF PASSPORT OFFICER, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI. 2. CONSUL (PPT), CONSULATE GENERAL OF INDIA, DUBAI (UAE), P.B.NO.737. 3. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, PASSPORT OFFICE, PASSEM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, PASSPORT OFFICE, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM. BY MR. P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.S.G, MR. TOJAN J.VATHIKULAM, ADDL.CGSC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/02/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.3406/2008-E: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 12/04/2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE CONSUL GENERAL OF INDIA, INDIAN CONSULATE, DUBAI, U.A.E. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 22/05/2007 ISSUED BY THE R.2. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE RECEIPT DTD. 02/01/2008 ISSUED BY THE CONSULATE GENERAL, DUBAI. EXT.P.4; COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 17/01/2008 ISSUED BY THE R.2. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT CLAUSE (1) (2) AND 6 (7) OF CHAPTER XIV OF THE PASSPORT MANUAL. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBIT: EXT.R4.A: COPY OF THE MINISTRY'S CIRCULAR NO. VI/401/61/2001 DTD. 23/01/2008. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No.3406 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner states that he is working as a Driver in the Transport Department at Dubai, UAE. Going by the pleadings in this writ petition itself, on 1/3/1999, the petitioner had obtained a passport (Passport No. H026336), from the Regional Passport Office, Cochin. In the Passport issued , his name was shown as Bhasi Suresh Kumar. The Passport was renewed and was valid till 22/02/2000. 2. In the meanwhile, the petitioner wanted to change his employment and according to him, on the advice of a Travel Agent he made another application before the Regional Passport Officer, Thiruvananthapuram for issuing a fresh Passport. Accordingly, on 31/05/2004 he was issued Passport No. E.8824567. The name shown in the second passport was Mr.Satheeshan Janaki. This passport was also renewed for 10 years with effect from 31/05/2004. 3. Petitioner submits that he lost his first passport and W.P.(C) No.3406/2008 2 thereafter, surrendered his second passport to the second respondent under cover of Exhibit P1 dated 12/04/2007. Petitioner states that on surrender of the passport as above, he was issued Exhibit P2 certificate stating that he had applied for a new passport. According to him, in terms of section 12 of the Passport Act, 1967, for keeping two passports, he was levied a fine of Rs.5,000/- and that equivalent amount was remitted as per Exhibit P3. Later, by Exhibit P4 he was informed by the second respondent that penalty he remitted was meant only for minor infringements and that the Government of India had decided that only an Emergency certificate can be issued to the petitioner in order to enable him to travel back to India. It was at that stage, this writ petition was filed praying for a direction to quash Exhibit P4, and direct the respondents 3 and 4 to consider Exhibit P1 application for a new passport. 4. On 11/02/2008, this Court passed an interim direction to the second respondent to issue a short term passport to the petitioner, pending disposal of the writ petition. From the communication dated 27/11/2008 that was received from the W.P.(C) No.3406/2008 3 second respondent, it would appear that a short term passport has been issued to the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that Exhibit P5 is the Passport Manual and that as per clause 6.2.(iii) he is entitled to be issued a new passport on the surrender of the passport that was available with him. 6. However, the respondents in their counter affidavit contend otherwise. It is contended that keeping two passports, as in this case, is an offence under Section 12 of the Passports Act. It is stated that for this reason, the Superintendent of Police, Thiruvananthapuram- Rural, has already been registered a crime against the petitioner as Crime No.295/2007. In so far as Exhibit P5 relied on by the petitioner to support his claim for a new passport is concerned, respondent submitted that by Exhibit R4(a) dated 23/01/2008, Exhibit P5 has already been withdrawn by the Government of India. It is also contended that in terms of provisions contained in the Passports Act, authorities are forbidden from issuing passport to a person who is an accused in a criminal case. It is also stated in the Counter Affidavit that the W.P.(C) No.3406/2008 4 second Passport was issued from the Regional Passport Office, Thiruvananthapuram on 28/05/1993 and is having No.P370501 and that it was got reissued for 10 years on 31/05/2004. They also contend that the petitioner has travelled on the strength of both the Passports. 7. The allegation in the writ petition that it was on the influence of the petitioner's estranged-wife and her brother that action has been initiated against the petitioner, is also denied. 8. From the facts as pleaded and stated by the petitioner himself, a case alleging offence under Section 498 A of IPC is pending against him before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Attingal as as CC. No. 702/2006. In that case, petitioner has been enlarged on bail and the case is pending trial. From the counter affidavit, it is also seen that Crime No.295/2007 is pending against the petitioner for offences under the Passports Act. Relying on the pendency of criminal cases as above, counsel for the respondent contended that in view of the provision contained in Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, Passport applied for by the petitioner in Exhibit P1 cannot be issued. W.P.(C) No.3406/2008 5 9. Section 6(2)(b) of the Passports Act provide that subject to other provisions of the Act, Passport Authority shall refuse to issue a passport, if proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by an applicant is pending before a Criminal Court in India. Reading of Section 12 shows that if an accused in a criminal case makes an application for passport, there is a clear restriction that the Passport Authority shall not issue passport. 10. In Exhibit P1, on the surrender of the second passport that the petitioner had, and that too in a wrong name, he applied for issuance of a new passport. Once an application is so made, his entitlement will certainly depend upon, the provisions of the Passports Act 1967 and the Rules, framed thereunder. 11. In view of provisions contained in Section 6(2)(f) imposing a clear restriction against issuing passport to a person who is involved in a criminal case, irrespective of the other controversies raised in this writ petition, this Court will not be justified in directing that the petitioner should be issued passport since it is the admitted position that there are at least W.P.(C) No.3406/2008 6 two Criminal Cases pending against him. Therefore, relief sought for in this writ petition cannot be granted. Writ petition fails and hence, it is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE scm