Allowed

Sana Muzammil Abdul Majeed v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC21 Jun 2018WP/98/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that the passport restriction on the petitioner should be removed. Despite her father being an absconding accused in the 1993 Mumbai Blast case, intelligence reports showed no adverse inputs against the petitioner, who is an employee in Dubai with well-known whereabouts.

What did the court decide?

Directed Passport Authorities to renew the petitioner's passport without any endorsement or restriction on travel.

Sana Muzammil Abdul Majeed Vs the State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2018)

917-wp.98.2018.doc

1/4

nsc.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.98 OF 2018

¶5

Sana Muzammil Abdul Majeed ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents

¶6

Mrs.Farhana Shah, for the Petitioner.

¶7

Mr.Anil C.Singh, Additional Solicitor General of India a/w Mr.D.P.Singh, Ms.Geetika Gandhi i/b Vijay Kumar, DPO, for Respondent Nos.2 to 4.

¶8

Mrs.A.S.Pai, A.P.P for the Respondent-State.

¶9

CORAM : R. M. SAVANT &

¶10

REVATI MOHITE DERE, JJ.

¶11

DATE : 21^st JUNE, 2018

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

The above Petition has been filed for a direction to the

¶14

Passport Authorities to issue passport to the Petitioner without any

¶15

restrictions, so as to enable her to travel anywhere in the world.

¶16

The Petitioner is the daughter of one Salim Abdul Gani Gazi,

¶17

who is an absconding accused of the Mumbai Bomb Blast Case. The Petitioner is an MBA and is working in RAK Bank at Dubai. The Petitioner is married to one Muzammil Abdul Majeed, who is also an MBA and works

¶18

917-wp.98.2018.doc

¶19

2/4

¶20

for Gulf News. The couple have two children. Insofar as, the Petitioner is concerned, the remark is endorsed on the Petitioner's passport to the following effect “This passport is valid for travel between UAE and India only”. It is aggrieved by the said endorsement that the Petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court for the relief that the authorities be directed not to put any such restriction in respect of the Petitioner's passport.

¶21

The above Petition had come up for admission on 12^th June, 2018, when the Passport Authorities were represented by the learned ASG Mr. Anil Singh. The learned ASG had informed us that the endorsement on the Petitioner's passport as well as on her mother's passport is on the basis of the inputs from the Intelligence. We had accordingly directed the learned ASG to submit a report to us on the next date. Accordingly, the learned ASG has today tendered the report of the Intelligence Agencies vide forwarding letter dated 14^th June, 2018 of the Assistant Passport Officer, PV-I, Mr.S.Kamalgarh. We have perused the report of the Intelligence Agencies. On such perusal, insofar as, the Petitioner is concerned, we do not find anything adverse against her, except the fact that she happens to be

¶22

917-wp.98.2018.doc

¶23

3/4

¶24

the daughter of an absconding accused of the 1993 Mumbai Bomb Blast case. The Petitioner must be a child when the said blast case took place. As indicated above, the Petitioner is working in a Bank in Dubai and her husband, is also working in Gulf News. The details insofar as, the Petitioner and her husband are concerned, disclose that they have roots in UAE and their whereabouts can therefore be stated to be well-known. Hence, in our view, so far as the Petitioner-Sana Muzammil Abdul Majeed is concerned, the authorities are directed to renew her passport, without any endorsement putting any restriction on her travel. It would be always open for the authorities to take appropriate action, if anything adverse and prejudicial to the interest of the State is brought to their notice or the conduct of the Petitioner is against the public interest.

¶25

With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶26

We clarify and reiterate that the instant directions are only insofar as, the Petitioner-Sana Muzammil Abdul Majeed is concerned. The report of the Intelligence Agencies is returned back to the learned ASG.

¶27

917-wp.98.2018.doc

¶28

4/4

¶29

All concerned parties to act upon an ordinary copy of the

¶30

instant order duly authenticated by the Court Associate/Sheristedar.

¶31

(REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)

¶32

(R. M. SAVANT, J.)

Sana Muzammil Abdul Majeed v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sana Muzammil Abdul Majeed v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shikha Amit Rana @ Miss Shikha Sharad Pathak D/O S. P. Pathak Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Vitthal Bandu Patil Vs S. N. Charaskar and Ors.

Kaushal Arvind Acharya Vs the Union of India

Attaullah Abdul Hamid Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Yogesh Ramnivas Mishra and Anr. Vs Yashasvi Yogesh Mishra and Anr.

Sharanabasava Lingayya Hiremath and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.