Abhijith U vs Union Of India
2021 Latest Caselaw 13425 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR
        MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 7TH ASHADHA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 11382 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

           ABHIJITH U
           AGED 23 YEARS
           S/O.JAYAPRAKASH UNIKKAL, UNIKKAL HOUSE, PARIYAPURAM,
           NEDUVA P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

           BY ADV C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL



RESPONDENTS:

    1      UNION OF INDIA
           REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF
           EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI-110001.

    2      THE PASSPORT OFFICER
           REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, KOZHIKODE, ERANHIPALAM P.O.,
           KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673006.

    3      STATE OF KERALA
           REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO HOME DEPARTMENT,
           GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001.

           BY ADV SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA



OTHER PRESENT:

           SR.RON BASTIAN, GP, SRI.P.VIJAYA KUMAR,ASGI



THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
28.06.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 11382 OF 2021
                                    2



                               JUDGMENT

Heard both sides.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner has applied for quashing the prosecution sought to be

launched against the petitioner and that challenge is pending before

the appropriate court. It is further argued that the petitioner has

submitted the representation at Ext.P7 to the 2 nd respondent

Passport authority requesting the said authority to issue the

passport without considering the pendency of the criminal case. The

learned standing counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submits

that the 2nd respondent has no power to grant passport in the event

of pendency of criminal cases against the applicant applying for the

passport.

3. I have considered the submissions so advanced. The

learned counsel for the petitioner insists that the petition be

disposed of with a direction to the 2 nd respondent to decide the

pending representation at Ext.P7 despite the fact that this Court

was willing to grant some time to the petitioner to apply to the

concerned Court of the Magistrate for seeking permission to obtain

the passport.

In the result, as the application at Ext.P7 of the petitioner is WP(C) NO. 11382 OF 2021

reportedly pending before the 2nd respondent. The petition is

disposed of with a direction to the 2nd respondent to decide the

application at Ext.P7 in accordance with law, within a period of two

weeks from the date of communication of this judgment to it by

the petitioner.

Nsd                                                   sd/-

                                                  A.M.BADAR
                                                     JUDGE
 WP(C) NO. 11382 OF 2021


                      APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11382/2021

PETITIONER ANNEXURE

Exhibit P1              THE TRUE COPY OF THE SECONDARY SCHOOL LEAVING
                        CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit P2              THE TRUE COPY OF THE PASSPORT APPLICATION OF
                        THE PETITIONER DATED 20.06.2019.

Exhibit P3              THE TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE APPOINTMENT
                        RECEIPT DATED 19.06.2019.

Exhibit P4              THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY

THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 01.07.2019.

Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.479/2018 OF TANUR POLICE STATION DATED 12.12.2018.

Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CASE STATUS OF CRL.M.C.NO.1287/2019 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 14.06.2021.

//true copy//

PA to Judge