IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2011 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 7595 of 2011(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SINDHU SREEKUMAR SREEDHARAN NAIR, W/O.SREEKUMAR, SHREYAS, (VELIYATH HOUSE), SOUTH CHITTOOR, CHERANELLOOR, COCHIN-682 027. BY ADV. SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND SRI.T.NIKLAVU SMT.V.AJITHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI.-110001 2. REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, KOCHI. PIN 682 001 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHERANELLOOR POLICE STATION, CHERANELLOOR, ERNAKULAM. PIN- 682027 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KURAVILANGADU POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. PIN 686633 ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR FOR R1 & 2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ------------------------- W.P (C) No. 7595 of 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 18th March, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is before this Court for giving a direction to the 2nd respondent for issuance of a duplicate passport bearing No.G1809931 which was issued to the petitioner on 20.3.2007. 2. The case of the petitioner is that, the said passport was having validity till 19.3.2017, which however, happened to be lost while in transit and hence the petitioner has sought for issuance of a duplicate passport. The said request of the petitioner was resisted by the respondents stating that the petitioner was involved in Crime No.454/2009 and hence issuance of fresh passport was not possible. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the passport of the petitioner was seized not in connection with any 'passport offence' or that the concerned authorities who seized the passport did not have any such case. The passport was not stated as necessary for the trial of the case. It is stated that the only W.P (C) No. 7595 of 2011 2 criminal case pending against the petitioner is Crime No.457/2009 of the Cheranalloor Police Station, which in fact is totally unconnected with the seizure of the passport. In connection with the said crime, when the Investigating officer came to the residence of the petitioner, they found the passport and the same was taken out and surrendered before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class II, Ernakulam. Petitioner preferred an application before the Magistrate's Court for release of her passport. The said petition was dismissed; which made her to approach this Court by filing CrlM.C No.3391/2009 culminating in Ext.P1 judgment. 4. As borne by Ext.P1, a positive finding was rendered by this Court holding that retention of the passport which was in no way connected with the case or investigation virtually amounted to impounding of the passport as held by the Apex Court in Suresh Nanda Vs. C.B.I [ AIR 2008 SC 1414]. It was in the said circumstance that a positive declaration was made, that the learned Magistrate should have released the passport to the W.P (C) No. 7595 of 2011 3 petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, pursuant to Ext.P1 verdict, the petitioner approached the Magistrate and the passport was got released; which subsequently was lost in transit, necessitating her to apply for a duplicate passport. 5. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents submits that with reference to statement filed before this Court that the enquiry revealed that the only crime with which the petitioner was connected is Crime No.454/2009 of the Chernalloor Police Station and that no other case is pending . 6. In the above circumstances, this Court finds that there is no rationale on the part of the respondents in declining the relief sought for with regard to the issuance of a duplicate passport. 7. Accordingly, the 2nd respondent is directed to issue a duplicate passport bearing No.G1809931 to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 'three weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is further made clear that the observations W.P (C) No. 7595 of 2011 4 made by this Court while disposing Crl. M.C 3391/2009 will remain in force and that the petitioner shall obtain formal permission from the concerned Magistrate before leaving India. The writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE ma