Partly allowed

Khairunnissa Begum v. The Regional Pass port office

Telangana HC5 Jun 2023WP/13045/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the Passport Authority to consider the petitioner's re-issue application on undertaking that she would not leave India during the pendency of her criminal trial without court permission and would cooperate with the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Respondent to consider the petitioner's fresh re-issue application, receipt of undertaking not to leave India during trial, certified copy of undertaking from trial court, and the ord

Khairunnissa Begum Vs The Regional… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³²⁵⁶ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Originat Jurisdiction)

¶4

MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND IWENTY THREE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: '13 045 0F 2023

¶8

Between:

¶9

Khairunnjssl Begqm, !//o- Rafeeq Ahmed Mohammad Aged 62 yrs occ Housewife, Rl/o. H. NO_20-503, - Gandhi Nagar, HuzuraU.O Xiri?nnagii District

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The Regional P^ass port office, Regional Passport office, Hyderabad, kummariguda, Secunderabad

¶13

...RESPONDENT

¶14

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature oi writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondent in not re-issuing the petitioner passport no. k473485'l vide proceedings no.Hy1075103766123 DT. 311312023 as illegal and arbitrary and consequen y direct the respondents to re_ issue/renew the petitioners passport no. k4734851on consideration of her application no.22- 1O15129877 dt 231O2t2O23

¶15

!A NO:1 oF 2023

¶16

Petition under Section 1 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent to re-issue/renew the petitioners passport no. K4734g51 ion consideration of her application no.22-1015129877 dl 23t0212O23 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. P RAVI KIRAN

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent: SRI B PRASANNA KUMAR SC FOR CENTRAL

¶18

GOVT

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

i i l

¶21

THE HON'I}L ' SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SIIDHEE)II I{UMAR VRIT PETITION No.1 3045 of 2o23

¶22

ORDER

¶23

lJci r rcl lc arnr:d counsr.l ior thc par:ii ia,ne! ;rncl Sri B. Prrrsanr a Kumar, Icarnr.rl Standing Coun rt:l f or the respondent.

¶24

',tl.l s WrLt Petition rs lllcd seeking _o clr:clare the action oI ther responderrt in not re-lssuing thc t)ctilioner,s passport b :aring \o.K4734851 utdt; : roccedings No.HY1O751lll 766123, dateci :1 i.O3.2023, as artr:r.rar"- and illcgal.

¶25

3r\ ccrusal oI lhe rct.ord vvould rc,real thirt the petitioner he:-ei 'r rs involved in a criminal case , ide- Crirre No.07 of 2022 of Wr>n en Po.:ice Station, Karimnagar Distr.i<:t, r.egisterecl for the offt:nce tnder Secrion 498A of I.P C. and St:ctic, ,r 4 ol the Dorvry l)rohrt,it.: .rr Act-, 19(r 1. Al'tirr completion of in.,: stipatior-r, the polce fileC 'harge shet:t and thr: same was t.rk(tn : I L file uid,e C.C.No.28 of 2( 2,3 pending ()n thc file ol .Judicial NIir?.istrato of I,'irst Class, S ce :iztl Mr>bile (Excisc) Court, Karimnagar 4. The petitioner he rein is holder of f )assp(,t.l b<:aring No.K4734t 51 a rd the samc rvas cxpired on 07.Og.20tlll. lihe is a houscu,itc. Sl e had submittcd an applicatiorr lrrr .,: issue of

\t\k,.J

--:

thc said passporr uide applicaticrn l.to. 22_ IO15t2gB77, Cated 23.02.2023 by paying rcquisitc fcc. The respondent herein js not rc-issuing her passport on the ground of pendency of the aforesaid crimina I casc.

¶30

The petitioner hercin is arraigned as accused No.3 in [hc aforesaid crirne. Now, shc contends t.hat she was [als,:l-v implicated in the aforesaici crime_ Further, she is also ready to cc-operative with the tr ierl. Thcrefore. she sought to issue necessaqr ciirections to the rcspondent for consideration of hcr application to re-issue her passport.

¶31

It is also relevant to note that the Hon,ble Apex Court in Vangala Kasturi Rangacharuyulu v. Ceatral .Bureau of Investigationl had an occasion to examine the provisions of. the Passports Act, pendenc.y of criminal cases and held that refusal of a passport can be only in casc where an applicant is convicted during the peri<_rd of five (5) years immediately preceding the date of application for an offence involving moral turpitude and sentence for imprisonment for not less than two years. Section 6.2 (f) relates to a situation u,here the applicant is facing trial in a criminal Court. The petitioner therein was convicted in a case for the offences under Sections 42O,469,471

¶32

'^{zozo crt.L.t} lscy^su z

¶33

¶34

\t\ k,.l s t) .l|r: lr lJ

¶35

¶36

ancl^{,l7l'At't:rrcl ,th I 2Otl ol lhc II'Cl ancl also S''ct otll1 ( 2) reacl} \'ith -ql'ct.rrn^I I^{(1) rlf th': Prevcntionol Corrr'Lpt r'n} "cl' 1988' Ag:rinsr sirich. al^{appt:ari\'as lil((l and thc sltnle1:1i;' tisl:tissed} Thc sentcncc^{,r ir.s reduced to ape riocl olor e.o 1) yci r''lhe} pcLitionel tl^{eI .:ir-t hzr.d approacltt:clthe Hon'blc} '\pt;<^{Ct urtby} \,a1. ol filin 3 rn^{alPPealand thcsamc} is pendLng. Ih,:rc[ore, considcri rg^Lf e^{szri(l lacls, the Hon'blc Apcx Cl.r'hctd that} Passport Auth )r^{ty cannot refusc renewalol thc paslllorton the} ground ol' pcr Jc ncy of^{the criminal appcal' '['hrts, Irt: lon'ble} Apex Ccurl lil'ecte d^{the Passport Authori y t'rr'(ln'lu/the} passport ol th ' z,pplicant^{$'i[hollt raisingthe olrjct:trc It rel'rtingto} the^{pendr-n(:y rf the aforesaid criminal appealin S C}

¶37

A , <liscussed above,^{there is criminzLlt itr;c rrending} againsl :he l^{etitionerhereinThe aforesaitl1>ass1 ort ol the} pctitione r v,a t:xpired on^{07.O82022. Shc had srtlrrn tledan} applicatron o t 23.02.2023^{for re-issue of lrerp rs;spt'rt The} respondcnt is nct considering^{the application lor re s su': on the} gr:ound o[ pr ntlency ol the^{aloresaid crimiral r:: s'' .On the} ground of^pe rclency of the^{proceedingsin crimin llcases, the} respond,:nts :annot deny^{re-issueof passpor-tol 1hr: p:titioner} herein.^'lh :r: is; uo^{provision in thePassl ot ts Act or} Rules/R<:grrli tions lhat^{passport cannot b':grarLtcd on the}

¶38

(

¶39

\ISK..t r,t, Il0l5 l0:.1

¶40

¶41

ground o[ pendcncy of criminal cases_ |lirther, thc petitioilcr herein is standing on bettcr footing rhiln the pctilioner. in Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu's case (1 supra). In view of the same, the respondent cannot den_v or refuse to renew the passport of the petitioner. Horvcver, if the petitioner is irrtending to travel abroad, she has to trpproach trial Court in the aforesaid criminal case and obtain perrnission for travc-lling abroad. In the picsent writ petitiorr, the petitioncr is not seeking permission to travel abroad, and she is seeking only re-issuance of her passport.

¶42

In view of the aforesaid Ciscussion, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent hcrein to consider the application No.22- IO15129877 , datcd 23.O2.2O23, submitted by. l-he petitioner seeking re-issue of her passport on the following conditions:

¶43

(i) The pctitioner herein shall submit arl undertaking Iong with an aIh<iavit in C.C.No.28 of 2023, pending on the file of learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kanmnagar Disfict, stating that she shall not leave India during pendency of the said C.C. without perrnission of the Court and that she shall co-operate with trial Court in concluding the proceedings in the said C.C.

¶44

(ir) On filing such an undertaking as well as alfidavit, the tria.l Court shall issue a certified ccpy of the same rvithin two (2) weeks therefrom;

¶45

(ii1) The petitioner herein sha-ll submit an application afresh along with certihed copy of this order as well as the aforesaid undertaking

\l\k.l

l-lil;i^1r' l

bc'lbre thr Pi s-. >olt CJlficerr.\uthoritv concernecl .br -e -r.rr,al oi hcr [)^{lr lispr]rt}

¶50

lit ) OrL til.n1 :,u<rh an :tpplicatron, the passpo-t r)lllrt,r,/Authorit!. slrrrll cr,ns.ide r I tc sarr,e afrr:sh rn the light o[ thc ot,serr,r ir, rs n:rclc br lhrs Cour ll('r( n ils well as the contents of thc urrdrrtalirl, ,3n.cn bl th(' pctiti,)ncr rrr re-issue of her passport in ac,:orCzLrL,:r, .,rith 1.,r."v. r,r,ilhin thrc,c tll) rv,:cks fr"om thc date of said applicariorL.

¶51

(r,) On rcrrc' a ol the passport, rhe petitioncr herr:in r;.r: ) deposit thi' origrnal r,rn u'ed pir.ssport before the trial Court in , .-.No 2g of 20-23; and

¶52

(r'il Hori.er.:r. Iibert5, 15 granted to the petitioner herr rr to filc r,m application b,:lc^-e the learncd Mag4rstrate seeking F,errnis,r n ro ira,(.1 abroad, alLd i- r ftrr thr: learne<l Magistrate to considcr lt,: srur,c. in accordanc,-' witt l; w

¶53

Miscella: re )us Peti[ions, if any, pending in t[-ris s,rit

¶54

pclitron s^-rail s and closed. I,lo costs.

¶55

To,

¶56

SD/. MOHD. SA,NATTLLAH ANSARI ASSI S..AI\IT REGISTRAR //TRUE COpy// , l) S;ECTION OFFICER

¶57

1 l!9!9O1o"gt lss^{port office, Regional passport office, -t)derabad,} KUmmangu(la secunderabad

¶58

2 One CC to Sl ll. P RAVI KIRAN Advocate tOpUCl 43 Two One CCCD Co to llF cit t s 3 PRASANNA KUrvlAR sc FoR e Erutr,r _ cow topucl KK J GJ P