Judgment:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE9H DAY OF SEPTEMBER201318TH BHADRA, 1935 WP(C).No. 22430 of 2013 (C) ---------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------- SHINENATH @ SHINENATH SWAMINATHAN, AGED45YEARS, S/O.K.K.SWAMINATHAN, VIDYA BHAVAN, THONNALLUR, PANDALAM (PO), PATHANAMTHITTA BY ADVS.SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.R.REJI SMT.THARA THAMBAN SRI.B.BIPIN RESPONDENT: ----------- THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN695024. BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASGI OF INDIA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON0909-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 22430 of 2013 (C) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ---------------------- EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE ORDER
PASSED BY THE IIIRD ADDITIONAL SESSION JUDGE DATED112/2012 IN CRL.APPEAL NO.667/2012. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE REPLY BY THE RESPONDENT DATED236/2009. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE ONLINE APPLICATION RECEIPT DATED87/2013. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL ---------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE cl P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C) No. 22430 of 2013 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 9th day of September, 2013 JUDGMENT
The petitioner is stated as aggrieved of the course and proceedings pursued by the respondent, whereby the request made by him to have the passport renewed in view of expiry of the same is declined, referring to pendency of a criminal case.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was involved in two criminal cases involving the offence under Section 420 of IPC. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that being aggrieved of the sentence imposed by concerned Criminal Court, the petitioner has preferred Crl. Appeal Nos. 352 of 2010 and 667 of 2012 which are pending before the District Court III, Thiruvananthapuram and IIIrd Additional Sessions Court, Trichur respectively, simultaneously pointing out that the sentences imposed upon the petitioner have already been suspended by the concerned Court. In the said circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to get the passport renewed; submits the learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. The learned Central Government Counsel appearing for the W.P.(C) No. 22430 of 2013 :
2. : respondent submits that, in view of the statutory prescriptions, no passport is liable to be issued or renewed, if any criminal case is pending, unless the party concerned produces necessary clearance from the concerned Court, where the matter is pending. Reliance is sought to be placed on the decision rendered by this Court in Asok Kumar Vs. State of Kerala (2009 (2) KLT712, where the relevant Circular issued by the Government is also been referred to, while explaining the course to be pursued.
4. In the said circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of, relegating the petitioner to approach the concerned Courts, where the matters are pending, by filing necessary application for getting the clearance as above within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On which, it shall be considered by the said Courts in the light of the decision rendered by this Court in Asok Kumar Vs. State of Kerala (cited supra) and appropriate orders shall be passed in accordance with law, forthwith. If clearances are given by the concerned Courts, the respondent shall consider the application preferred by the petitioner for renewal of his passport, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 'two weeks' from W.P.(C) No. 22430 of 2013 :
3. : the date of receipt of such application, with the clearance as aforesaid. The Writ petition is disposed. Sd/- P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE) kmd