B JOHN PANDIAN Vs. REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking for a direction to the first respondent to renew his passport bearing file No.MASV00006811, dated 04.01.2011 as per his representation dated 6.9.2011.

(2.) WHEN the matter came up on 22.6.2012, this court directed notice to be served on the Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the Passport Department and also on the Special Government Pleader appearing for the second respondent, i.e., the District Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District. Accordingly, on notice, the first respondent has filed a counter affidavit, dated 19.7.2012 together with typed set of papers in support of the averments found in the counter affidavit. The learned Special Government Pleader also produced a communication sent by the second respondent to the first respondent Regional Passport Officer and the enclosures made thereunder.

(3.) IN the counter affidavit, it was stated that on verification the Commissioner of Police, Chennai had stated that the petitioner was involved in Crime No.45 of 1993 registered under Sections 147, 148, 341, 323,324, 332, 427, 407, 435, 511 of IPC. He was shown as accused No.40. The same is pending before the Sempatty Police Station, Dindigul. Therefore, the matter was referred to the Superintendent of Police, Dindigul on 26.04.2011. The status report was sent by the second respondent. He had reported that the crime was still pending before the Judicial Magistrate-II, Dindigul and an arrest warrant was issued against the petitioner on 30.5.2011. Therefore, the status of the petitioner's passport application was again informed by the first respondent on 7.9.2011 in response to the representation of the petitioner. A further reply was sent to the petitioner on 24.9.2011. Therefore, the question of granting any direction sought for by the petitioner cannot be considered.