Allowed

Syed Mujahid v. Regional Passport Office

Karnataka HC4 Apr 2024WP/1315/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, an approver in a criminal case, filed a writ petition seeking the return of his passport held by the Passport Office for religious travel to Mecca. Due to the Appellant in the case specifically directed the Passport Office to return the passport without delay, subject to a condition requiring court permission for any future international travel. The petition was disposed accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Directed the first respondent to return the petitioner's passport within seven days, subject to a condition requiring court permission for any future international travel.

Syed Mujahid Vs Regional Passport Office — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

NC: 2024:KHC:13843 WP No. 1315 of 2024

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 1315 OF 2024 (GM-PASS)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SYED MUJAHID S/O LATE SYED HASHAM SAHIB, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT NO.49, M.M ROAD, FRAZER TOWN, PULIKESHINAGAR, MOORE ROAD, BANGALORE-560005

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. SAGAR N., ADV. FOR SRI. MUZAFFAR AHMED, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE OFFICE OF REGISTRAR PASSPORT OFFICE, 8^TH BLOCK, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560095 [email protected]

¶14

Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

THE MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS REGISTRAR PASSPORT OFFICE, 8^TH BLOCK, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560095

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI.SHANTHI BHUSHAN H., DSGI A/W SRI. UMESH P B., CGC FOR R1 AND R2)

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC:13843 WP No. 1315 of 2024

¶20

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO RETURN THE PASSPORT BEARING NO.U1681372 BELONGING TO THE PETITIONER.

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The petitioner is before this Court seeking a direction by issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to return the passport, which is in the custody of the first respondent on surrender by the petitioner.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel Sri.Sagar N., for Sri.Muzaffar Ahmed, appearing for the petitioner and the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India,

¶25

Sri.Shanthi Bhushan H., along with Sri.P.B.Umesh, Central Government Counsel, appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2.

¶26

The petitioner gets embroiled in a crime which becomes a special case for offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 120(B) read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 9 of KPID Act, 2004. The petitioner was arrayed as accused No.15. During the pendency of the trial before the concerned Court, the petitioner files an application under Section

¶27

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:13843 WP No. 1315 of 2024

¶28

306 of Cr.P.C., seeking to transpose himself as an approver in the case. Owing to the application filed by the petitioner, the order dated 15.03.2023 is passed by the concerned Court transposing the petitioner to be a witness / approver, in place on him being an accused i.e. accused No.15. After the petitioner turning as approver, statement under Section 164(5) of Cr.P.C., is recorded before the concerned Court. It is after that the petitioner seeks return of the passport to travel to Mecca. The passport having not returned by the first respondent has driven the petitioner to this Court, in the subject petition.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits and undertakes that whenever he is required to tender evidence as an approver, he would without fail appear before the concerned Court and co-operate with the trial. It is his submission that he is intending to travel to Mecca for religious purposes and would be back, within four weeks from the date of travel.

¶30

The learned Central Government Counsel

¶31

Sri.Umesh P.B., who represents the Union of India along with the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India,

¶32

¶33

NC: 2024:KHC:13843 WP No. 1315 of 2024

¶34

Sri.Shanthi Bhushan H., had projected that since the case involves the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the CBI needs to give its no objection for return of the passport.

¶35

The learned counsel for CBI also has no objection for returning the passport in favour of the petitioner.

¶36

In that light, the passport held by the first respondent shall be returned to the petitioner, without brooking any delay, subject to the condition that the petitioner, whenever wants to travel beyond the shores of the nation, shall seek permission from the hands of the concerned court where the proceedings in which the petitioner is an approver, is pending and travel only after such permission is granted.

¶37

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed with a direction to the first respondent to return the passport of the petitioner, within seven days from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.

¶38

KG/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10

¶39

Sd/JUDGE

Syed Mujahid v. Regional Passport Office

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Mujahid v. Regional Passport Office

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

M/S Adiga Recreation Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri D S Prasanna Kumar Vs Canara Bank

Sj Enterprises Vs State of Karnataka

Mohammed Imran Vs Regional Passport Officer

Smt Sunitha G Vs M/S Sbfc Finance Pvt. Ltd.

Mr v Jaganath Vs M/S City Union Bank Ltd.