Kerala High Court
Fousiya Shebeer vs Regional Passport Officer on 21 May, 2024
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MAY 2024 / 31ST VAISAKHA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 17399 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
FOUSIYA SHEBEER
AGED 42 YEARS, W/O SHEBEER THAIPURATHE,
SAKEENA MANZIL, THAIKKATTUKARA P.O ALUVA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683 106.
BY ADV
PRAVEEN K. JOY
RESPONDENT:
REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER
PANAMPILLY NAGAR P.O COCHIN,
PIN - 682 036.
BY ADV
T.C KRISHNA, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT COUNSEL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 21.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.17399 of 2024
:2:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 21st day of May, 2024
The petitioner states that she is the holder of an
Indian Passport bearing No.N3565395.
2. The petitioner approached the respondent to
renew the Passport. The respondent informed the petitioner
that there are two criminal cases pending against the
petitioner. So, the petitioner should submit court order to the
respondent for the renewal of the Passport.
3. The petitioner is the accused in ST Nos.71 of
2023 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kollam and ST
No.57 of 2022 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court,
Ernakulam. The offence alleged against the petitioner is
under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. This is
a false personal case between private parties and not an
offence against State. The Chief Judicial Magistrate Court,
Kollam and the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court,
Ernakulam granted bail to the petitioner in ST No.71 of 2023
and ST No.57 of 2022. The conditions of bail do not include
surrender / deposit of Passport. But, the respondent refused
to renew the Passport of the petitioner.
4. The petitioner is well aware of the crimes and she
is appearing in the Court during the proceedings. The
petitioner submitted a representation to the respondent to
accept the application for renewal of Passport. The delay in
considering the application for renewal of passport will cause
huge and irreparable injury and loss to the petitioner,
contends the Counsel for the petitioner.
5. Deputy Solicitor General of India entered
appearance on behalf of the respondent and resisted the writ
petition.
6. Heard.
7. It is evident from the Statement filed by the
petitioner that even in cases where criminal cases are listed
against an applicant for Passport, such applicants can obtain
permission from the competent criminal court for travelling
abroad and on the basis of such permission, the Passport
authorities can consider the application for issuing a short
duration Passport as ordered by the criminal court. The
petitioner would submit that she is ready to approach the
competent courts and obtain necessary permissions.
In view of the facts as stated above, the writ
petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to
approach the competent jurisdictional criminal court for
obtaining permission to travel abroad. If the petitioner obtains
such order from the criminal court and produces the same
before the respondent or the Passport Seva Kendra
concerned, the respondent shall consider the application for
issuance of fresh Passport in accordance with law.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH
JUDGE
AMR
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17399/2024
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PASSPORT BEARING NO.
N3565395 DATED 09.10.2015 ISSUED BY
THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
19.03.2024 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO
THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
25.01.2024 IN WP(C) 1867/2024 ISSUED
BY THE THIS HON'BLE COURT.
