Jharkhand High Court
Dr. Divya Rashmi vs The State Of Jharkhand .... Opp. Party on 8 January, 2024
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
1 Cr.M.P. No.2903 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 2903 of 2022
Dr. Divya Rashmi, aged about 46 years, W/o Dr. Ananjay Kumar
Shrivastava, resident of Qr. No. C/4, D.V.C. Colony, C.T.P.S.
Chandrapura, P.O. & P.S. -Chandrapura, District -Bokaro (Jharkhand)
.... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... Opp. Party
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
.....
For the Petitioner : Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, Addl. P.P.
.....
By the Court:-
1. Heard the parties.
2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the
jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer
for setting aside the order dated 06.06.2022 passed by the court of
learned S.D.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat in Dugda P.S. Case No. 08 of
2016, corresponding to G.R. No. 122 of 2016 in Cri. Misc. Petition
No. 1704 of 2022 by which issuance of N.O.C. in respect of
renewal/re-issuance of the petitioner's passport has not been
allowed.
3. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner is an accused of
the said case and cognizance has been taken inter alia against her
for having committed the offences punishable under Sections
304A/34 of Indian Penal Code and on 06.06.2022, in the learned
trial court, the petitioner filed a petition under Section 258 of Code
of Criminal Procedure.
4. The learned S.D.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat in view of the fact that
Cr.M.P. No. 2620 of 2021 and Cr.M.P. No. 2567 of 2021 is pending
before the Court, thought it fit not to grant the prayer for issuance
of no objection certificate in favour of the petitioner for renewal/
re-issuance of the said passport from the Ministry of Home
Affairs, Regional Passport Office, Ranchi and rejected the same.
5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner referring
to Section 6 (2) (f) of the Passport Act, 1967 which reads as under:-
6. (2) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the passport
authority shall refuse to issue a passport or travel document
for visiting any foreign country under clause (c) of sub-
section (2) of Section 5 on any one or more of the following
grounds, and on no other ground, namely:--
(a)xxxx
(b)xxxx
(c)xxxx
(d)xxxx
(e)xxxx
(f) that proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have
been committed by the applicant are pending before a criminal
court in India;
as well as Section 22 of the said Act which reads as under:-
22. Power to exempt.--Where the Central Government is of
the opinion that it is necessary or expedient in the public
interest so to do, it may, by notification in the Official Gazette
and subject to such conditions, if any, as it may specify in the
notification,--
(a) exempt any person or class of persons from the operation
of all or any of the provisions of this Act or the rules made
thereunder; and
(b) as often as may be, cancel any such notification and again
subject, by a like notification, the person or class of persons to
the operation of such provisions.
and also the notification dated 25.08.1993 G.S.R. (E) No. 570 (E)
which reads as under:-
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of
Section 22 of the Passports Act, 1967 (15 of 1967) and
in supersession of the notification of the Government of
India in the Ministry of External Affairs No. G.S.R.
298(E), dated the 14th April, 1976, the Central
Government, being of the opinion that it is necessary in
public interest to do so, hereby exempts citizens of India
against whom proceedings in respect of an offence
alleged to have been committed by them are pending
before a criminal court in India and who produce orders
from the court concerned permitting them to depart
from India, from the operation of the provisions of clause
(f) of sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the said Act, subject
to the following conditions, namely:--
(a) the passport to be issued to every such citizen shall
be issued--
(i) for the period specified in order of the court
referred to above, if the court specified a period
for which the passport has to be issued; or
(ii) if no period either for the issue of the passport
or for the travel abroad is specified in such order,
the passport shall be issued for a period of one
year;
(iii) if such order gives permission to travel
abroad for a period less than one year, but does
not specify the period of validity of the passport,
the passport shall be issued for one year; or
(iv) if such order gives permission to travel
abroad for a period exceeding one year, and does
not specify the validity of the passport, then the
passport shall be issued for the period of travel
abroad specified in the order.
(b) any passport issued in terms of (a)(ii) and (a)(iii)
above can be further renewed for one year at a time,
provided the applicant has not travelled abroad for the
period sanctioned by the court; and provided further
that, in the meantime, the order of the court is not
cancelled or modified;
(c) any passport issued in terms of (a)(i) above can be
further renewed only on the basis of a fresh court
order specifying a further period of validity of the
passport or specifying a period for travel abroad;
(d) the said citizen shall give an undertaking in
writing to the passport-issuing authority that he
shall, if required by the court concerned, appear before
it at any time during the continuance in force of the
passport so issued. (Emphasis supplied)
that in exercise of the power conferred by clause (a) of Section 22
of Passport Act, 1967, the Central Government being of the
opinion that it is necessary in the public interest to do so, has,
exempted citizens of India, from the operation of provisions of
clause (f) of sub-section 6 of Passport Act, 1967; against whom
proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have committed by
them are pending before a criminal court in India, if such citizens
produce orders from the court concerned, permitting them to
depart from India.
6. On being asked by this Court as to when the petitioner intend to
go and to which country and for which period, learned counsel
for the petitioner submits that he has no such information.
7. But it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that
the order dated 06.06.2022 passed by the court of learned S.D.J.M.,
Bermo at Tenughat in Dugda P.S. Case No. 08 of 2016,
corresponding to G.R. No. 122 of 2016 in Cri. Misc. Petition No.
1704 of 2022 be quashed.
8. Having heard the submissions made at the bar and after going
through the materials in the record, it is pertinent to mention here
that from the notification, the copy of which placed by the learned
counsel for the petitioner as already mentioned above in this
judgment, it is apparent that the inter alia the trial Court
concerned may in appropriate cases permit any accused of any
criminal case to depart from India but the notification does not
provide for according of no objection certificate for granting of
passport.
9. Under such circumstances, this Court does not want to interfere
with the order dated 06.06.2022 passed by the court of learned
S.D.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat in Dugda P.S. Case No. 08 of 2016,
corresponding to G.R. No. 122 of 2016 in Cri. Misc. Petition No.
1704 of 2022; as there being no provision to grant no objection
certificate, rejection of such prayer cannot be termed illegal.
10. Under the fact and circumstances of this case this criminal
miscellaneous petition is disposed of with an observation that in
case, the petitioner has any specific and definite proposal to
depart from India for any specific purpose; then the petitioner
may file an application before the learned trial court with a prayer
for permitting him to depart from India and in case, such prayer is
made before the learned trial court, the learned trial court may
consider the same in view of the provision of the notification
G.S.R. 570 (E) dated 25.08.1993.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi
Dated the 8th January, 2024
AFR/Sonu-Gunjan/-
