Writ petition challenging unauthorized seizure of passport at the airport due to alleged suspicion of attempting to breach a travel ban on Yemen.
Directed the Regional Passport Officer to obtain petitioner's undertaking and return the passport or issue a new one.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
THURSDAY ,THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 25TH MAGHA, 1940
WP(C).No. 3691 of 2019
PETITIONER:
AJIKUMAR DAMODARAN PILLAI AGED 42 YEARS S/O DAMODARAN PILLAI, KOCHUVEETTIL HOUSE, PUTHENKOTTACKAKAM, CHENNITHALA(P.O), ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.M.VIVEK
RESPONDENTS:
1 CHIEF PASSPORT OFFICER, CPV DIVISION, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, PATIALA HOUSE, NEW DELHI, PIN-110001.
2 THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM,PIN-682036.
BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 3691 of 2019
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner's allegation in this writ petition is that his valid passport, issued by the competent Passport Authority, was unauthorisedly seized at Thiruvananthapuram International Airport while he was travelling to the United Arab Emirates on a visit visa and that the same has been illegally forwarded by them to the Regional Passport Office, Kochi. According to him, he is not aware as to why his passport was so seized and he prays that the second respondent - Regional Passport Officer, be directed to return the same to him forthwith.
WP(C).No. 3691 of 2019
3
petitioner, in refutation of the afore submissions, contends that the alleged suspicion harboured by the respondents is totally untenable because he has declared in Ext.P5 application that he does not intend to travel to Yemen and that he is no longer employed there. He says his client only wants to travel to the UAE on a visit visa and that he will not make any attempt to travel to Yemen as long as the travel ban is in force.
In the afore circumstances, I direct the second respondent to consider Ext.P5 application of the petitioner and after obtaining all necessary undertaking from him that he will not travel to Yemen as long as it is proscribed under law, release the passport to him or if that is not possible, issue a fresh passport, so that the valid Yemen visa cannot be misused by him.
Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
stu
JUDGE
WP(C).No. 3691 of 2019
4
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
| EXHIBIT P1 | TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAGE OF THE PETITIONER'S PASSPORT. |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P2 | TRUE COPY OF THE TOURIST/SINGLE-SHORT VISA DATED 12-11-2018. |
| EXHIBIT P3 | TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL PRINTOUT OF THE RETURN TICKET. |
| EXHIBIT P4 | TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 16-12-2018 CAUSED BY 3RD RESPONDENT. |
| EXHIBIT P5 | TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 07.01.2019 CAUSED BY PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. |
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A TO JUDGE.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the regional passport officer should have detained the passport instead of returning it or issuing a fresh one.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
AJIKUMAR DAMODARAN PILLAI
CHIEF PASSPORT OFFICER
REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER
FOREIGNER REGIONAL REGISTRATION OFFICER
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
