Allowed

Dr P Vanaja v. Union of India

Telangana HC17 Apr 2023WP/9897/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the Regional Passport Officer to consider the petitioner's passport application despite pending criminal case proceedings, distinguishing Supreme Court precedent, while imposing conditions for police verification, affidavit undertaking, and deposit of issued passport with the trial court.

What did the court decide?

The Regional Passport Officer directed to consider the application for passport within three weeks of filing a fresh application with this order, subject to undertaking conditions and deposit of passp

Dr P Vanaja Vs Union of India — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Telangana HC (2023)

,aa

[³¹⁶⁸ ]

I I

I I I I I I

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAO (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶6

MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶7

PRESENT

¶8

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO.9897 OF 2023

¶10

Between:

¶11

Dr. P. Vanaja, D/o P. Laxminaryana, Age: 59 years, Occ: Doctor, No.1-4-230, Elasila Nursing Home, Suryapet, Suryapet District.

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

AND

¶14

Union of lndia, Rep. by its Secretary Ministry of External Affairs, PSp Division, New Delhi

¶15

The State o1 Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Bldgs, Saifabad, Hyderabad

¶16

The Regional Passport Officer, Passport office, Kummarguda, Secunderabad.

¶17

The Assistant Passport Officer, Passport Seva Kendra, Secunderabad.

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

Petition under Arlicle 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 of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents No. 3 and 4 in not issuing passport in pursuanc€ of application No. HY75CS024300723 Dt. 21-3-2023 as illegal, arbitrary and violative Article 21 of Constitution of lndia.

t ! ! , I I I

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

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 respondents 3 and 4 to issue^passport to the Petitioner to travel^abroad.

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioner: M/S. N.^ARTHI

¶26

Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1,^{3 &} 4:^{SRI GADIPRAVEEN KUMAR,} DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL^OF INDIA

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent No.2:^GP FOR^HOME

¶28

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶29

¶30

,I lr t'

¶31

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAXSHMAN

¶32

WRIT PETITION No.9897 of 2o23

¶33

ORDER:

¶34

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor Genera,l of India appearing for respondent Nos. I to 3 and learned Government Pleader for Homc appearing for respondent No.4. Perused the record

¶35

Perusa-l of the record would reveal that the petitioner herein is an accused in Crime No.487 of 2018 ol Vanasthalipuram Police Station, Rachakonda District registered for the offences punishable under Sections - 42O and 468, 471 r/w.120(8) of IPC and 156(3) of Cr.p.C, and after completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer had hled charge sheet. The same was taken on lrle vide C.C.No.548 of 2021. It is pending on the file XXIV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Hayathnagar, Ranga Reddy District.

¶36

¶37

The petitioner hcrein has submitted an applicatior-r for issuance of passport vidc application No.HY75C50243OO723. dated 21.O3.2023 by^paying requisite fce. She has also frled status^{report dated} 07.O4.2023, wherein, it is stated that "Police^Verification Report is not clear and application^{is under review at} Rcgional Pzrssport Officcr".^{The respondentsherein are} not issuing passport on^{the ground of pendencv of the} aforesaid criminal case.

¶38

Learned counsel appearing^{for the petitionerwould} submit that due to lack^{of knowledge petitioner herein} has not mentioned^{aboutpendencyof the aforesaid} criminal proceedings^{against him in the application dated} 21.03.2023. It is^{neither willful nor wanton' He would} further submit that the^{petitioner herein is arraignedas} accused No.2 in the^{aforesaid crimeand she was falsely} implicated in the aforesaid^{crime. Further, she is also} ready to co-operate with the trial. Therefore, she sought

¶39

¶40

to issue necessary directions to the respondents lor consideration of her application to issue passport

¶41

Respondent No.3 cannot deny renewal of Passport on the ground that aforesaid Criminal Case is pending against him. It is a-lso relevant to note that the Apex Court in Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu v. CentralBureau of Investigationr had an occasion to examine the provisions of the Passports Act, pendency of criminal cases and held that refusal of a passport can be only in case where an applicant is convicted during the period of hve (O5) years immediately preceding the date of application for an offence involving moral turpitude and sentence for imprisonment for not less thal two years. Section 6.2 (f) relates to a situation where the applicant is facing trial in a criminal Court. The petitioner therein was convicted in a case for the offences under Sections _ 42O, 468, 471 and 477A read with 1208 of the IpC and also Section - 13 12) read with Section 13 (1) of the

¶42

' ;ozo^crt.r-.1. 1sc;^szz

¶43

¶44

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Against which, an appeal was filed and the saine was dismisscd.^The sentence r,r,as reducecl to a period of one^{(O 1) year. The} petitioner therein had approached the Apex Court by^way of filing an appeal and the same^{is pending. Therefore,} considering the said f:rcts, the^{Apex Court held that} Passport Atrthority cannot^{refuse renewalof the passport} on the ground of^{pendency of the criminalappeal' Thus,} the Apex Court directed^{the Passport Authorityto renew/} issue the passport of^{the applicant without raising the} objection relating to^{the pendencyof the aforesaid} criminal case.

¶45

As d iscussed above,^{the aforesaid criminal case is} pending against the petitioner^{herein. He had submitted} an application on 2t.O3.2O23^{for issuance of passport'} Respondent No.3^{is not consideringthe application for} issuance of passport^{on the groundof pendency of the} aforesaid crimina1 case. On the ground of pendency of the proceedings in criminal cases, respondent No.3

¶46

I I :

¶47

)

¶48

cannot deny for issuance of^passport to the^petitioner hercin. There is no provision in the Passports Act^or Rules,/ Regulations that passport cannot be granted on the ground oi pendency of criminal cases. Further, the petitioner herein is standing on better footing than the petitioner in Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulur. In view ol the same, respondent No.3 carnot deny or refuse to issuc passport to the petitioner-

¶49

In view of the aforesaid discussion, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.3 herein to consider the application No.HY75C5O243OO723, dated 21.O3.2O23 submitted by the petitioner seeking to issue passport on the following conditions:.

¶50

i) The petitioner herein shall submit an undertaking along with an affidavit in C.C.No.548 of 2021 , pending on the fiIe of the XXIV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Hayathnagar, Ranga Reddy District, stating that he shall not leave India during pendency of the said C.C. without permission of the Court and that he shall co-operate with trial

I I i I I I

i ,I 1 I I

I l i I .l I

Court rr-t corlcluding the proceedings in^the said c.c.

¶56

ii) On filing slrch an undertaking as well^as affidavit, the trial Court shall issue^{a certified} copy of the same within two^{(O2) weeks} therefrom:

¶57

iii) The petitior-rer herein shall^submitar applicatiorr :rfresh along^{with certified copy of} tl-ris ordcr as u'cll as the^{aloresaid undertaking} before tl're Passport^{Officer/Authority} concerned for issuance^{of passport;}

¶58

iv) On filing such an^{application, the Passport} Olficer/Authorit-v shall^{consider thesarne} afresh in thc light of the^{observations made by} this Court herein as^{weli as the contentsof the} undertaking given by^{thepetitionerfor} issuance of passport, in accordance^{with law,} within three⁽⁰³⁾ weeks^{from the date of said} application;

¶59