RAM CHANDER Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks quashing of the FIR No. 78/2011 registered under Section 420 IPC at P.S. IGI Airport, New Delhi. Addressing arguments on the present petition, counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and the only allegation levelled against the petitioner is that his passport was found re-stitched by an ordinary thread by the immigration staff of Delhi Police. Counsel also submits that it is not the case of the police that the passport of the petitioner was not genuine or any pages of the passport were found missing or there was any kind of malice on the part of the petitioner in re-stitching of the same with the help of an ordinary thread. Counsel also submits that on 9.7.2010, the petitioner was to reach Auckland (New Zealand) for the purpose of doing diploma course in management and he was carrying genuine and valid passport along with genuine study visa but he was occluded by the Immigration Officer creating a suspicion over the said passport and visa of the petitioner. Counsel also submits that the petitioner is from a village background and taking advantage of the same, the petitioner was told to pay bribe money to the immigration officer to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- otherwise he had threatened to implicate him in a false case. Counsel also submits that the immigration officer had taken the passport of the petitioner in his custody and thereafter had registered this false case against the petitioner on 9.2.2011. Counsel also submits that the police has also registered a case under Section 420 IPC although there are no allegations of any kind of cheating against the petitioner. Counsel also submits that the petitioner is a young student of 23 years of age and even if the allegations leveled by the police in the said FIR are taken to be correct no case either under Section 420 of IPC or under Section 12 of the Passport Act is made out against the petitioner.

(2.) The present petition is strongly opposed by the counsel for the State. Counsel submits that the petitioner has leveled false allegation of corruption against the immigration officer without even naming the said immigration officer. Counsel also submits that the passport of the petitioner was found to be re-stitched with an ordinary thread by Forgery Detection Cell of India Security Press and because of the re-stitching of the said passport by the petitioner a clear case of violation of Passport Act, 1967 is made out against the petitioner. Counsel also submits that it is a settled legal position that the passport is a document, issued by a national government, which certifies the identity and nationality of its holder and the same being a Government security document cannot be tampered with by the holder of the passport. Counsel also submits that the petitioner had also never made any complaint to any superior officer against the alleged demand of bribe money by the immigration officer.

(3.) Based on the above submissions, counsel for the State submits that the petitioner has been correctly implicated in the present case and the contentions raised by the petitioner in the present petition can only be appreciated during the trial of the case.