Madras High Court
R.Anandhan vs The Passport Officer on 2 January, 2024
Author: Anita Sumanth
Bench: Anita Sumanth
2024:MHC:5612
W.P.No.32976 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 02.01.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
W.P.No.32976 of 2023
and
W.M.P.No.32652 of 2023
R.Anandhan .. Petitioner
vs
1.The Passport Officer,
Regional Passport Office,
Tiruchirappalli.
New Municipal Complex,
Thillai Nagar 7th Cross,
Tiruchirappalli.
2.The Superintendent of Police,
Ariyalur District. .. Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a writ of certiorari to call for the entire records
relating to the summon issued by 1st respondent in
F.No.TR1075194781923 dated 12.04.2021 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Gokulakrishnan
For Respondents : Mr.P.K.Ganesh CGSC for R1
No appearance for R2
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging a notice
issued by the first respondent / the Passport Officer, Regional
Passport Office, Tiruchirappalli calling for his appearance with
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
regard to issuance of passport on the ground of receiving adverse
police verification report.
2. The petitioner was a holder of passport bearing
No.H7296574. He claims that the passport had been misplaced and
he thus applied for re-issuance of the same on 22.03.2023. In that
application, the petitioner does not appear to have disclosed the
pendency of a First Information Report in Crime No. 263 of 2018
for alleged offence under Sections 279 & 337 of IPC pending before
Inspector of Police, Sendhurai Police Station.
3. The enquiry caused by the respondents on the
application of the petitioner broughtout the pendency of the
aforesaid FIR and, a show-cause notice had been issued calling for
an explanation on 12.04.2023. It is as against the aforesaid notice
dated 12.04.2023, that the present writ petition has been filed.
4. The petitioner would argue, relying on the decision of
the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Navin Kumar Sonkar v Union of
India and others (ILR 2018 MP 677) and the decision of Delhi High
Court in Manish Kumar Mittal v Chief Passport Officer and another
[2013 SCC Online Del 3007] that mere pendency of a criminal case
cannot be invoked as a ground for action to impound the passport.
5. Mr.P.K.Ganesh, learned CGSC, who appears for R1
would only reiterate that the application filed by the petitioner had
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
not been full and true and that there had been no disclosure of
pendency of criminal case.
6. Having heard learned counsel, I am of the view that
the instant writ petition is pre-mature apart from being
misconceived.
7. In the counter affidavit filed by the Regional Passport
Officer on 08.12.2023, they would reiterate the adverse police
verification report as well as the fact that there have been no
response from the petitioner to the communications from their
office, for more than five months.
8. This Court is of the categoric view that it was
incumbent upon the petitioner to have responded to the notice and
tendered an explanation and it is inappropriate for the present writ
petition to have been filed without extending any cooperation
whatsoever to the authorities in the enquiry consequent upon the
petitioner's application.
9. Thus, the petitioner is permitted to appear before R1
on any working day between 08.01.2024 and 12.01.2024 at 10.30
a.m. and put forth his submissions in response to the notices,
including the impugned notice.
10. R1 will thereafter pass an order on the application of
the petitioner for re-issue of passport, bearing in mind the settled
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
position of law that mere pendency of a criminal case would not
stand in the way of such reissuance. Reference may be had in this
regard to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vangala
Kasturi Rangacharyulu v. Central Bureau of Investigation (Criminal
Appeal No.1342 of 2017 dated 27.09.2021), as well as orders
passed in the cases of Suresh V. Regional Passport Officer
(W.P.No.30019 of 2023 order dated 17.11.2023) and Nedumaran
Palaniappan V. Regional Passport Officer (W.P.No.28448 of 2023
order dated 24.11.2023)). This exercise shall be completed as
expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.
11. This writ petition is disposed in terms of this order. No
costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
02.01.2024
Index:Yes/No
Neutral Citation:Yes
ssm
To
1.The Passport Officer,
Regional Passport Office, Tiruchirappalli.
New Municipal Complex,
Thillai Nagar 7th Cross,
Tiruchirappalli.
2.The Superintendent of Police,
Ariyalur District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
DR. ANITA SUMANTH,J.
ssm
02.01.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
