This is the third writ petition filed by the very same writ petitioner seeking for issuance of passport.
2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
3.I perused the materials placed before this Court.
4.The respondents have filed a counter affidavit.
5.The petitioner sought for issuance of passport through his application, dated 11.08.2014. The same was not considered in view of the receipt of adverse police verification. However, the petitioner was called upon to show cause for suppression of criminal cases pending against him in his passport application. It appears that the petitioner accepted his pending criminal cases through his explanation dated 14.11.2014. Therefore, the petitioner was advised to approach the Passport Office on completion of criminal cases pending against him. However, the petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P.(md).No.8940 of 2015, seeking for issuance of passport. This Court vide order, dated 04.06.2015, made in the said writ petition directed the Regional Passport Officer to consider the claim of the petitioner on merits and in accordance with law. Consequent upon such order, passed by this Court, the respondent called for explanation from the petitioner. The explanation submitted by the petitioner dated 17.02.2015 and 30.04.2015 did not contain proper details about the pending criminal cases and the reason for suppression of criminal cases in his passport application. Therefore, the petitioner was informed through communication dated 01.07.2015 to submit his explanation with regard to suppression of criminal cases in his application.
6.It is stated that the petitioner has not responded to the said communication dated 01.07.2015. Consequently, his passport application was treated as 'refused' under Sections 6(2) (f) and 12(1) (b) of Indian Passport Act, 1967 and the same was informed to the petitioner through communication dated 04.09.2015. The petitioner filed another writ petition in W.P.(MD).No.14378 of 2015 again seeking for issuance of passport. An order came to be passed on 07.09.2015 in the said writ petition, wherein, the petitioner was directed to produce all the relevant particulars with regard to Cr.No.638 of 2011 to enable the respondents to verify the same.
7.The petitioner submitted a representation on 19.10.2015 enclosing the order of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kuzhithurai, passed in S.T.C.No.49 of 2012 in Cr.No.638 of 2011, convicting the petitioner for the offence committed therein. Due to the receipt of the adverse police verification and in view of the recommendation made by the Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District, not to issue passport to the petitioner, the petitioner was informed through a letter dated 05.01.2016 to furnish his explanation within 30 days from the date of receipt of the said letter. It is stated that the petitioner has not submitted his explanation to the letter dated 05.01.2016. Therefore, it is contended by the respondent in his counter affidavit that if the petitioner submits a fresh application for passport with copies of orders, with details of criminal case and the explanation for suppression of criminal cases against him, it will be referred to the Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District and his passport application will be processed in accordance with the Indian Passport Act, 1967.
8.To put it more clearly, the averments contained at paragraph No.16 of the counter affidavit is extracted hereunder:
?16.It is submitted that if the petitioner submits a fresh application for passport with copies of order on disposal of criminal cases pending against him before Court of law and explanation for suppression of criminal cases pending against him, thereafter, it will be referred to the Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District for their reports and on receipt of clear police verification report, his passport application will be processed in accordance with Indian Passports Act, 1967 or if the petitioner submits a fresh application with an order of the concerned Court permitting him to travel abroad, his application will be processed in accordance with the Indian Passports Act, 1967.?
9.From the above narrated facts and circumstances of the case, it is evident that the petitioner is repeatedly approaching this Court only seeking for a mandamus without giving proper explanation, as sought for by the respondents and responding to the notice issued by them. Therefore, this Court, at this stage, cannot issue a direction to the respondents to issue passport to the petitioner, as it is for the petitioner to satisfy the respondents by way of clear explanation, as sought for at paragraph No.16 of the counter as extracted supra.
10.Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the respondents with a fresh application for passport with required documents, as sought for by the respondents. If any such application is filed, it is for the respondents to consider the same on its own merits and in accordance with law. No costs.
1.The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Bharathi Ulla Veethi, Race Course Road, Madurai - 625 002.
2.The Passport Officer, Passport Seva Kendra, Tirunelveli City, No.13, South Bye Pass Road, Xavier Colony, Tirunelveli City - 627 005..