Allowed

Suresh Kumar v. the Regional Passport Officer

Kerala HC14 Dec 2015Crl.MC/7674/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of an order disallowing a passport renewal application by an accused who already possessed a travel permission from the same court for another case.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order in CMP No.4303 of 2015 set aside; Magistrate directed to revive CMP No.4303 of 2015, allow the prayer, and impose necessary conditions.

Suresh Kumar Vs the Regional Passport Officer — Kerala HC (2015) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/23RD AGRAHAYANA, 1937

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 7674 of 2015 (E)

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OP(Crl.) 168/2014 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 17.09.2014

¶7

CRIME NO. 289/2012 OF CHIRAYINKEEZHU POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶8

C.C.NO.1208 OF 2012 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, ATTINGAL

¶9

PETITIONER/ACCUSED :-

¶10

SURESH KUMAR, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O. BHASI, KOZHIYOTTUMADOM, CHIRAYINKEEZHU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR

¶12

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS :-

¶13

1. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, PASSPORT OFFICE, SNSM BUILDING, KARALKADA JUNCTION, PETTAH P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 024.

¶14

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 695 001.

¶15

R1 BY ADV. SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL R2 BY SRI.JUSTIN JACOB, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

rkj

¶18

Crl.MC.No. 7674 of 2015 (E)

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES :-

¶21

ANNEXURE A1 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20-08-2014 ISSUED BY THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT -I, ATTINGAL IN CMP NO. 3791/2014 IN C.C.NO. 389/2009.

¶22

ANNEXURE A2 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, ATTINGAL IN CMP NO. 3709/2015 IN C.C.NO. 389/2009 DATED 10-9-2015.

¶23

ANNEXURE A3 - TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT I, ATTINGAL AS CMP 4303/2015.

¶24

ANNEXURE A4 - CERTIFIED COPIES OF THE DEPOSITIONS OF PWS 1 TO 3.

¶25

ANNEXURE A5 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26-11-2015 IN CRL.M.C.NO. 7136/2015 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶26

ANNEXURE A6 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27-11-2015 IN CMP NO. 4303/2015 IN C.C.NO. 1208/2012 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT I, ATTINGAL.

¶27

ANNEXURE A7 - TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17-9-2014 IN O.P.(CRL.) OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶28

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEUXRES :- NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

rkj

P.UBAID, J.

============================

¶34

Crl.M.C.No.7674 of 2015

¶35

============================

¶36

Dated this the 14^th day of December, 2015

¶37

ORDER

¶38

The petitioner herein is the first accused in C.C.No.1208 of 2012 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Attingal. Pending the proceedings he made an application before the learned Magistrate as CMP No.4303 of 2015 for permission to renew his passport. The request was disallowed by the learned Magistrate on 27.11.2015. The petitioner is aggrieved by the said order, and it is sought to be quashed. The Annexure -A1 order shows that from the very same court the petitioner had earlier obtained order in C.C.No.389 of 2009, permitting him to go abroad on certain conditions. It is not known whether this Annexure-A1 order was brought to the notice of the successor Magistrate who disallowed the request in CMP No.4303 of 2015. It is submitted that the petitioner has been working abroad for more than twenty years, and that if he is not allowed to join his

¶39

Crl.M.C.No.7674 of 2015 2

¶40

employment there, he will lose it forever. Having already obtained an order in his favour in another case, the petitioner approached the learned Magistrate for the required permission in another case. It is not known why the second application was disallowed by the learned Magistrate, when the petitioner has already been granted permission to go abroad in another case. In the present circumstances, where the Court has already granted permission to the petitioner to go abroad, or to apply for a passport, there is no meaning in denying permission to renew his passport.

¶41

In the result, this petition is allowed. The impugned order in CMP No.4303 of 2015 will stand set aside, and the learned Magistrate is directed to revive CMP No.4303 of 2015, allow the prayer, and impose the required necessary conditions as done in C.C.No.389 of 2009.

Sd/-

P.UBAID JUDGE

rkj

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

Suresh Kumar v. the Regional Passport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Kumar v. the Regional Passport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdul Jaleel Vs Rahmath

Vinodkumar Vs State of Kerala

Najeeb Vs State of Kerala

Haridas @ Narayanankutty Vs State of Kerala

Ajitha Vs Beena

Majeed Vs State of Kerala