IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2011 / 30TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 15134 of 2011(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER/4TH ACCUSED --------------------------------------- IRSHAD P., S/O. KUNHABDULLA, PURERI HOUSE, THIRUVALLUR AMSOM DESOM, VADAKARA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VADAKARA. 673101. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 3. S.I.IMMIGRATION, CALICUT AIRPORT, KARIPUR. 673031. 4. REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, KOZHIKODE. 673001. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.HANIL KUMAR R3 & R4 ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASG OF INDIA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 15134 of 2011(N) ----------------------------------------- APPENDIX ----------------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT.P1. COPY OF THE VISA EXT.P2. COPY OF THE SEIZURE MEMO EXT.P3. COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL --------------------------------------- / TRUE COPY / P.A. TO JUDGE VK ANTONY DOMINIC, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.15134 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to respondents to release his passport which was seized on 16.6.2010 by the respondents. 2. Learned Government Pleader has obtained instructions in the matter. According to the learned Government Pleader the reason for seizure is that the petitioner is an accused in Crime No.742/2009 of Vadakara Police Station, registered for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 307 IPC. It is stated that subsequent to the registration of the said crime, without disclosing the said fact, the petitioner made an application for passport and obtained the same under the Tatkal Scheme. 3. It is stated that subsequently show cause notice was issued but he did not respond to the same. The matter was reported to the Immigration Department informing that W.P(C) No.15134 of 2011 2 by using the passport, the petitioner had left the country. It is stated that when the petitioner came back to India on his reporting at the Immigration Department his passport was seized for the aforesaid reasons. 4. Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act renders an accused in a criminal case ineligible to be issued passport. Therefore, at time when the petitioner applied for the passport, if he had disclosed the fact that he is an accused in a criminal case, he would not have been issued the passport. 5. Therefore, since the issuance of the passport was irregular, respondents were entitled to seize the passport as and when the petitioner reported to the Immigration Department of the Airport on his arrival in the country. In that view of the matter this Court will not be justified in issuing any direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Writ Petition fails and it is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC ab JUDGE