Mohammad Kaleem vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home And ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 898 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 9
 
Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 10969 of 2017
 
Petitioner :- Mohammad Kaleem
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home And Ors
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Saini
 
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate,A.S.G.
 

 
Hon'ble Ajai Lamba,J.

Hon'ble Ravindra Nath Mishra-II,J.

1. This petition seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing respondent no.3 (Station House Officer, Police Station- Dhanepur, District- Gonda) to submit correct police report in passport office in regard to Case Crime No. 218 of 2012 under Sections 3/5/8 U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act and Section 352 I.P.C, Police Station- Dhanepur, District- Gonda and final order passed by Juvnile Justice Board, Gonda dated 06.12.2014.

2. It appears that the petitioner applied for a passport. It further appears that the petitioner did not indicate that he was involved in a criminal case. Consequently, Annexure-1 was served on the petitioner.

3. Annexure-1 dated 01.12.2016 notices that as per online police remark there is a criminal case registered against the petitioner. The petitioner was called upon to furnish suitable explanation within 30 days.

4. Although it has been pleaded that the petitioner furnished suitable explanation, however none is available on record. Be that as it may, Annexure-3 dated 03.01.2017 issued in the name of Government of India, Ministry of External Affairs Regional Passport Office, Lucknow notices that the petitioner had not furnished response and therefore the file has been closed.

5. Annexure-2 appears to be an order passed by Principal Judge Juvnile Justice Board Gonda dated 06.12.2014 which notices that the petitioner was convicted in Case Crime No. 218 of 2012 (supra) . The order further stipulates that fine has been imposed and on payment of fine the matter is closed and the conviction and sentence would not effect the future of the petitioner.

6. Apparently the petitioner was required to disclose the criminal case and conclusion thereof. The petitioner did not disclose that information therefore notice was issued to which the petitioner did not respond as is apparent from Annexure-3.

7. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, we are unable to issue any direction to the passport officer.

8. The petition is dismissed.

9. The petitioner may avail other remedies and pursue his case with Regional Passport Officer/ Ministry of External Affairs.

Order Date :- 19.5.2017

Pachhere/-