THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.28059 of 2014 Dated : 19.09.2014 Between:
Arvind Jain @ Arvind Kumar Bhalgat, S/o.M.G.Jain, aged 41 yrs, Occu : Auto Finance Business, R/o.H.No.6-1-868, Khairatabad, Hyderabad .. Petitioner And The Union of India, Rep., by its Joint Secretary, Consular Passport & Visa Division (CPV), Ministry of External Affairs, Patiala House, Tilak Marg, New Delhi & another .. Respondents This Court made the following :
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.28059 of 2014 ORDER :
The petitioner applied for passport and the same was acknowledged on 13.07.2012. But so far no passport is issued. On 22.04.2014 a notice was served on the petitioner informing him that the passport authority received information from the police that he was involved in a crime registered against him in Crime No.47 of 2012 under Section 420 r/w. Section 109 of Indian Penal Code of Police Station Central Crime Station, Hyderabad, and the passport authority desired to ascertain the status of the case and to furnish the judgment of the Court. Instead of answering the requirement as desired by the passport authority, the petitioner in his reply dated 16.05.2014 gave a vague reply and no further orders are passed. This writ petition is instituted contending that for no fault of the petitioner and only on the ground that the crime is registered against him, the passport is not released.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is only a victim of the crime committed by the main accused. The allegation against the main accused was that he borrowed loans against motor vehicles by pledging the same vehicle with two financiers. However, he is also implicated in the crime registered. So far there is no progress in the crime investigation and so far no charge sheet is filed. Learned counsel further submits that unless charge sheet is filed and trial commences, the application for passport cannot be denied.
3. As seen from the record in the writ petition when specific information was sought by the passport authority in the letter dated 22.04.2014, the petitioner instead of explaining to the passport authority has given a vague reply.
4. Having regard to the same, the writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to place the true and correct facts before the passport authority in response to the letter dated 22.04.2014, and request the passport authority to issue passport. On receipt of such further representation by the petitioner, the 2nd respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders as warranted by law within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of such further representation. There shall be no order as to costs.
5. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed.
P.NAVEEN RAO,J 19th September, 2014 Rds