Dismissed

Narkis Parvin v. the Regional Passport Officer

Madras HC11 Mar 2021WP(MD)/1549/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the Passport Officer to renew and reissue her passport electronically. The dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioner was already subject to directions from a parallel criminal court preventing her travel abroad until trial completion, leaving her to seek modification of that order in the criminal court.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition seeking renewal and reissuance of the passport was dismissed with no costs.

Narkis Parvin Vs the Regional Passport… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.1549 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 11.03.2021

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.1549 of 2021

¶7

Narkis Parvin .. Petitioner

¶8

¶9

The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Municipal Water Tank Building, W.B.Road, Trichy -8, Trichy District.

¶10

.. Respondent

¶11

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent herein to renew and reissue the passport bearing No.T 6076734 vide File No.TR1072090249919 in the form of newly Electronically updated Typed format to petitioner in the light of the representation dated 16.12.2020 within a stipulated period as may be fixed by this Court.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sundar For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi Standing Counsel

¶13

ORDER

¶14

When the matter is taken up for hearing today, Mr.M.Karunanithi, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent has produced a copy of the order passed by the learned single Judge of this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.19319 of 2016, dated 09.10.2020, wherein, the very same petitioner has approached this Court for quashing of the charge sheet and in that context, the learned single Judge, while dismissing the said criminal original petition, has passed the following direction:-

¶15

“7.In view of the above discussions, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.223 of 2015 in Crime No.164 of 2010 on the file of the learned II Additional District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kumbakonam. Considering the age of the petitioners, the personal appearance of the petitioners are dispensed with and they shall be represented by a counsel. However, the petitioners shall be present before the Court at the time of furnishing of copies, framing charges, questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C and at the time of passing judgment. The trial Court is directed to complete the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

1/2

¶17

W.P.(MD)No.1549 of 2021

¶18

trial in C.C.No.223 of 2015, within a period of nine months from the date of receipt of copy of the order.”

¶19

2.The learned single Judge earlier insisted the petitioner that she may be permitted to go abroad in view of the fact that her second daughter needs to be assisted by her since she is in crucial stage of conception. However, this Court finds that in view of the specific direction as extracted above, this Court in a parallel proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot give any permission to the petitioner to go abroad, though earlier this Court was inclined to grant such direction. However, this Court in the fitness of things is of the view that it is for the petitioner to approach the criminal side of this Court and seek clarification/modification of the order by bringing the requirements of her daughter and seek appropriate directions, if she is so advised.

¶20

3.In view of the same, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition and accordingly, the same stands dismissed. No costs.

¶21

// True Copy //

¶22

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶23

¶24

+1 CC to M/s.M.KARUNANITHI, Advocate ( SR-10731[F] dated 12/03/2021 )

¶25

W.P.(MD)No.1549 of 2021 11.03.2021

¶26

SJ(CO) TR(12.03.2021) 2P 2C

¶27

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶28

2/2

Narkis Parvin v. the Regional Passport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narkis Parvin 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 Jabbar. M.R Vs The Inspector General of Registration

Gunasekaran Vs the Sub Registrar

Ram Anand.R Vs the Inspector General of Registration

Ramar.S Vs the District Revenue Officer

Palaniyappan.N Vs the Assistant Executive Engineer

Krishnan Vs the District Revenue Officer