Kerala High Court
Sooraj.P vs The Regional Passport Officer on 11 April, 2024
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 13908 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
SOORAJ.P,
AGED 37 YEARS
S/O. PUSHKARAN V.B GARDEN FLAT NO.2
BLOCK-4 WEST KAKKANAD P.O CHEMBUMUKKU,
PIN - 682030
BY ADVS.
SADCHITH.P.KURUP
C.P.ANIL RAJ
SIVA SURESH
B.SREEDEVI
ATHIRA VIJAYAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER
REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, SHIHAB THANGAL ROAD,
PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI, PIN - 682036
2 MINI CHARLES
W/O CHARLES JOSEPH V.B GARDEN, G3, BLOCK 1 WEST
KAKKANAD P.O CHEMBUMUKKU, PIN - 682030
BY ADV KRISHNA T C
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 11.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.13908 of 2024
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 11th day of April, 2024 The petitioner states that he is a former President of V.B. Garden Resident Association (2021-2022). During the tenure of the petitioner, the 2 nd respondent was involved in Crime No.384/2022 of Thrikkakkara Police Station under Sections 460, 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The petitioner states that the 2nd respondent has obtained a Passport suppressing the criminal case pending. The petitioner has made a complaint in this regard before the 1st respondent-Regional Passport Officer. The 1 st respondent has not taken any action to cancel the Passport of the 2nd respondent obtained suppressing the pendency of criminal case.
3. Senior Panel Counsel, Government of India entered appearance and resisted the writ petition. The Senior Panel Counsel submitted that along with the complaint, the WP(C) No.13908 of 2024 3 petitioner has only forwarded FIR. No further materials are available. It is not known whether the FIR has culminated into a Final Report and whether a charge sheet has been filed against the 2nd respondent. In view of the above, unless the petitioner provides further materials, no action can be taken as Passport has already been granted.
4. Taking into consideration the afore facts, I am of the view that to prosecute this case, the petitioner has to submit further materials in order to establish that a charge sheet has been filed against the 2nd respondent.
Grating liberty to the petitioner to do so, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
N.NAGARESH JUDGE spk WP(C) No.13908 of 2024 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13908/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR DATED 22.04.2022 IN CRIME NO.384/22 THRIKAKKARA POLICE STATION Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 02.02.2024 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER OT THE 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DATED 2.02.2024