Disposed

Niyas Abdul Khareem v. Union of India

Kerala HC11 Feb 2016WP(C)/5134/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the impounding of his passport by the passport authority. The Court noted the petitioner was free to invoke statutory remedies via an appeal. Since the petitioner had filed an appeal, the appellant authority was directed to dispose of it within two months. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Directed the appellate authority to dispose of the appeal within two months from the date of receipt of the judgment; writ petition disposed of.

Niyas Abdul Khareem Vs Union of India — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/22ND MAGHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 5134 of 2016 (N)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

NIYAS ABDUL KHAREEM, S/O ABDUL KARIM, AGED 36 YEARS, HAVING PERMANENT RESIDENCE AT "NIYAS MANZIL", CHAVARA POST, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.P.V.VENUGOPAL SRI.L.RAJESH NARAYAN SRI.R.SABU

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI, PIN-1170323.

¶11

2. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, PASSPORT OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001

¶12

3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001

¶13

R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BIJU MEENATTOOR

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

sts

¶16

WP(C).No. 5134 of 2016 (N)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶19

EXT.P1:	TRUE COPY OF EMPLOYMENT APPROVAL NUMBER WP 00039184 ISSUED THROUGH DEPARTMENT OF IMMIGRATION AND EMIGRATION OF REPUBLIC OF MALDIVES.
EXT.P2:	TRUE COPY OF RENEWED INDIAN PASSPORT BEARING NO. J 7473452 IN FAVOUR OF PETITIONER ISSUED THROUGH THE INDIAN ATTACHE MALDIVES.
EXT.P3:	TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WPC 39688/15 DT. 23/12/15 BY THIS HONOURABLE HIGH COURT
EXT.P4:	TRUE COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.761/13 UNDER SECTIONS 323,498A, 506 DT. 01/6/2013
EXT.P5:	TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN CRL M.P 1783/13 DT. 22/6/13 ALLOWING RELEASE VIDE ENLARGMENT IN BAIL BY HONOURABLE SESSIONS JUDGE, KOLLAM.
EXT.P6:	TRUE COPY OF PRIVATE COMPLAINT BEARING NO. C.M.P. 8138/13 ON THE FILES OF HONOURABLE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KARUNAGAPALLY
EXT.P7:	TRUE COPY OF FIR IN CRME NO. 1509/13 U/S 406,379,403,424,427,477 AND 489 R/W 34 IPC WAS REGISTERED BY CHAVARA POLICE.
EXT.P9:	TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN CRL.M.P. 621/14 DT 12/3/14 BY HONOURABLE SESSIONS JUDGE, KOLLAM.
EXT.P10:	TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DT. 12/8/15 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC.NO. 23676/2015.
EXT.P11:	TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DT. 2/1/2015 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
EXT.P12:	TRUE COPY OF REPLY DT. 8/1/2015 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT
EXT.P13:	TRUE COPY OF ORDER/NOTICE DT. 9/12/2015 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT
EXT.P14:	TRUE COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE OFFICE VIDE F.NO. VIII/402/APP-01/2016 DT. 6/1/16 ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE OFFICE VIDE F.NO. VIII/402/APP-01/2016 DT. 7/1/16
RESPONDE	NT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/

¶20

sts P.A.TO JUDGE

¶21

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶22

================== W.P.(C).No. 5134 of 2016

¶23

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

¶24

Dated this the 11^th day of February, 2016

¶25

J U D G M E N T

¶26

The petitioner approached this Court aggrieved by the proceedings initiated by the passport authority, impounding the passport. The petitioner's case is that a mere pendency of the criminal case cannot be a ground to impound the passport. In fact the petitioner had approached this Court in an earlier occasions seeking re-issuance of the passport. This Court directed the petitioner to approach criminal court where case is pending to obtain permission to go abroad.

¶27

The issue relating to the impounding had not been substantially considered by this Court. The petitioner has a statutory remedy against the impounding proceedings by filing an appeal. If the petitioner is aggrieved by impounding, certainly the petitioner is free to invoke statutory remedy by filing an appeal. It appears that the petitioner has preferred an appeal. In

¶28

W.P.(C).No. 5134 of 2016 - : 2 :-

¶29

that view of the matter, this Court is of the view that if the petitioner has already filed an appeal under Section 11 of the Passport Act, the appellate authority shall dispose the appeal within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment.

¶30

The writ petition is disposed of, as above.

¶31

sd/-

¶32

sab

¶33

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE

Niyas Abdul Khareem v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Niyas Abdul Khareem v. Union of India

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

K.Y.Thomas Vs Kerala Khadi & Village Industries Board

Saju John Vs U v Jose , District Collector, Kottayam

Dr.Zeenath K.S. Vs Mohamed Basheer .K

Sahil Sabi Vs the Controller of Examinations

M.R.Valsakumar Vs State of Kerala

Sulaiman Vs the District Geologist