Faisal vs The Passport Officer
2023 Latest Caselaw 4621 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                          PRESENT
      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
 WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2023 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1945
                    WP(C) NO. 9999 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

          FAISAL,
          AGED 28 YEARS
          S/O HABEEB, CHAPPAYIL PUTHEN VEEDU
          ROSE NAGAR-34, ARUNOOTTIMANGALAM CHERRY
          MANGADU VILLAGE, KILIKOLLOOR PO KOLLAM (DIST),
          PIN - 691004.

          BY ADVS.
          C.R.JAYAKUMAR
          NOBEL RAJU

RESPONDENT:

          THE PASSPORT OFFICER,
          SNSM BUILDING, KARALKADA JUNCTION, KAITHAMUKKU P.O,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695024.

          SRI.S MANU, DSGI


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 12.04.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No. 9999 of 2023

                                   2




                                 JUDGMENT

The petitioner is an Indian Citizen and is the holder of Passport

No.L1757921. His grievance is that citing the reason that the petitioner is

involved in Crime No.242/2018 of Kilikolloor Police Station, the Regional

Passport Officer has refused to renew the passport. It is in the afore

circumstances that this writ petition is filed seeking issuance of directions to

the respondent to renew the passport of the petitioner within a time frame.

2. Sri. C. R. Jayakumar, the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner, would point out that the petitioner herein had challenged the

proceedings in Crime No.242/2018 of the Kilikolloor Police Station by

preferring Crl. M. C. No. 127 of 2022 and a learned Single Judge of this

Court by an interim order dated 28.1.2022 has stayed the submission of the

final report till disposal of the Crl. M.C. Relying on the judgment of this

Court in Thadevoose Sebastian v. Regional Passport Officer [2021 (5)

KLT 531], the learned counsel contends that if cognizance has not been

taken and the criminal proceeding is still pending, there is no impediment in

the passport authority in considering the grant of passport.

3. I have heard the learned DSGI and have considered the W.P.(C) No. 9999 of 2023

submissions.

4. I find from Ext. P1 interim order that this Court has deferred

the submission of the final report. In Muhammed Ali v. Union of India

and others [2018(4) KHC 945], this Court has held that a criminal

proceeding can be stated to be pending only if cognizance of the case is

taken by the jurisdictional Magistrate. In that view of the matter, there

cannot be any impediment in considering the request of the petitioner.

Resultantly, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to

consider the application submitted by the petitioner for renewal of the

passport and take appropriate decision, expeditiously, in any event, within a

period of three weeks.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE Sru W.P.(C) No. 9999 of 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9999/2023

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDERS OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 28.01.2022 IN CRL MC NO. 127/2022.

Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PASSPORT OF THE PETITIONER BEARING NO. L-1757921 ISSUED AT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

Exhibit P3 APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF PASSPORT DATED 27.02.2023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL