Swaran Singh vs Union Of India And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 9595 P&H

                                                     Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:085865




CWP-7307-2023                      -1-                 2023:PHHC:085865

204     IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                     AT CHANDIGARH

                                          CWP-7307-2023
                                          Date of Decision:07.07.2023

SWARAN SINGH                                                ......... Petitioner

                                      Versus

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS                                   ....... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Present :     Mr. D.S. Virk , Advocate
              for the petitioner.

              Mr. Ankur Sharma, Senior Panel Counsel
              for the respondents.

                     ****

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226/227

of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to issue passport to the

petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that

petitioner applied for passport. The petitioner deposited requisite fee

alongwith requisite documents. The petitioner appeared before concerned

authority on 23.03.2022 alongwith documents. The Passport Authorities

marked inquiry to police officials for verification of credential of the

petitioner. The police officials submitted a report disclosing that FIR

No.67 dated 24.11.1993 under Section 15 of NDPS Act was registered

against the petitioner and he stands acquitted vide judgment dated

05.12.1997 passed by Sessions Judge, Sangrur. Another FIR No.59 dated

27.03.1997, under Section 15 of NDPS Act was registered against the

petitioner. He was awarded sentence which was reduced to undergone by

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:085865

CWP-7307-2023 -2- 2023:PHHC:085865

Hon'ble High Court in CRA-1297-SB-2001 vide order dated 25.08.2010.

As on day no criminal case is pending against the petitioner and case of

the petitioner does not fall in any of the restricted categories

contemplated under Section 6 (2) of Passport Act, thus, petitioner is

entitled to passport.

3. Mr. Ankur Sharma, Senior Panel Counsel, appearing on

behalf of the respondents does not dispute the aforesaid factual position

and assures the Court that Passport Authority would pass speaking order

after considering afore-stated facts within a period of 6 weeks from

today.

4. In view of the statement of learned counsel for the

respondents, the present petition stands disposed of.

                                               ( JAGMOHAN BANSAL )
                                                      JUDGE
07.07.2023
Ali
                   Whether speaking/reasoned    Yes/No

                        Whether Reportable      Yes/No

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:085865

2 of 2