Telangana High Court
Mirza Adil Rafeeq Baig vs The Union Of India on 24 April, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO.10929 OF 2024
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:-
"...to grant appropriate relief, more in the nature of a
Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
declaring the Show Cause Notice No.30(603)POL/2016, dated
04.10.2016 issued by the second respondent seeking explanation
about the petitioner's involvement in a criminal case vide
FIR.No.441/2016, dated 22.08.2016 u/s.498-A IPC, Sections 3 &
4 of D.P. Act of PS Mailardevpally, Cyberabad, despite closing the
subject by the Consular Section on the ground of pendency of
criminal case before the Ranga Reddy Sessions Court and
petitioner's clarification as sought for, as highly discriminatory,
illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violating Articles 14, 16,
19 and 21 of the Constitution of India."
2. The case of the petitioner is that, after divorce with his
first wife, he got married for the second time on 10.06.2023 as
per the Muslim rites and customs. A complaint has been lodged
by the petitioner's wife vide Crime No.441 of 2016, dated
22.08.2016 of P.S. Mailardevpally, Cyberabad, for the offences
punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and
Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Acting on
the said complaint submitted by the wife of the petitioner, the
second respondent has issued a show cause notice vide
proceedings No.30(603) POL/2016, dated 04.10.2016 directing
the petitioner to furnish explanation within 15 days from the
date of receipt of the show cause notice. It is the further case of
the petitioner that, in pursuance of the show cause notice, he
appeared before the respondents and explained the reasons for
registration of the case and requested them to withdraw the
show cause notice and when the respondents have not acted
upon the said request, the petitioner has registered his
grievance on 17.09.2020 and even after registration of the
grievance/complaint vide I.D.No.SB1PIA107237920, but till
date, the respondents have not taken any action to address his
grievance or closing the show cause notice issued to the
petitioner in the year 2016.
3. Mr. Godugu Narender, learned counsel for the petitioner,
while placing reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court in
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India 1, has submitted that mere
registration of the criminal case against the petitioner does not
take away the right of the petitioner to possess the passport. It
is further submitted that every person is presumed innocent
unless he is proven guilty and pendency of criminal case against
a person is not a ground to conclude that he cannot possess or
hold a passport. Even under Section 10(d) of the Passports Act,
1967 ("the Act, 1967" for brevity), a passport can be impounded
only if the holder has been convicted of an offence involving
moral turpitude to imprisonment not less than two years.
1 (1978)1 SCC 248
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that, in
view of the provisions of the Act, 1967, the action of the
respondents in impounding the passport, reissuing or cancelling
the passport without following the procedure amounts to
violation of the rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India. It is the further case of the petitioner
that, since the respondents have not taken any action on his
grievance, dated 17.09.2020 or the show cause notice, the
petitioner has submitted a representation to withdraw the show
cause notice, dated 04.10.2016.
4. Mr. Aravind Katta, learned Standing Counsel appearing
for the respondents 1 and 2, contended that the present Writ
Petition is filed questioning the show cause notice and as such,
the Writ Petition filed by the writ petitioner is not maintainable.
5. It is settled law that mere pendency of a criminal case is
not a ground to conclude that the petitioner is not entitled to
possess passport under the provisions of the Act, 1967.
6. After considering the submissions of the respective
counsel, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this Writ
Petition directing the petitioner to make a fresh representation
to the respondents duly including the acquittal orders in Crime
No.441 of 2016, dated 22.08.2016 of P.S. Mailardevpally,
Cyberabad, seeking to withdraw the show cause notice or for
reissuance of the passport, if the petitioner is entitled, subject
to complying with the provisions of the Passports Act, 1967 and
the Rules made thereunder.
7. With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed
of.
There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous
applications, if any, pending shall stand closed.
___________________________
C.V. BHASKAR REDDY, J
24th April 2024
RRB
