W JAIHAR WILLIAM Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As issue involved in all these writ petitions is one and the same, they are disposed of by way of this common order. These writ petitions have been filed praying for issuance of a writ of Mandamus to direct the 3rd respondent to issue passport to the petitioners.

(2.) The petitioners herein have applied for issuance of passport, with an intention to leave to go abroad for seeking their livelihood. They have made the applications to the 3rd respondent on different dates. While they were eagerly awaiting for issuance of passport, vide his proceedings (different dates) the 3rd respondent has informed the petitioners that he has received an adverse police verification report corresponding to their application for passport and directed the petitioners to give suitable explanation within 30 days regarding the circumstances under which, they had suppressed the material information in the passport application regarding the pendency of criminal cases. Thereafter only, the petitioners came to know that their names have been falsely implicated by the Police in the First Information Report, for having participated in the agitation against the Koodankulam Nuclear Project. It is the case of the petitioners that on the date of their application for passport, no criminal case was pending against them and they have not received summons from any Court of Law and no Court of Law had taken cognizance of the offence alleged to have been committed by them. Hence, the petitioners have sent explanations to the 3rd respondent stating that they have not suppressed any information in their application for passport, regarding the pendency of the criminal case. Thus, they sought for issuance of passport. But, even thereafter, the 3rd respondent has not considered their application for passport and as such, the petitioners are not in a position to go abroad for securing employment. Hence, the present writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners for the relief as stated supra.

(3.) The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavits, by taking a common stand in all the writ petitions that on receipt of the applications of the petitioners for issuance of passport, the same was referred to the Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli, under Section 5(2) of the Passports Act, 1967, for verification of character and antecedents on 01.11.2011; in response, an adverse police verification report was received from the Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli, in respect of each of the petitioners; the petitioners are involved in the agitation against the Koodankulam Nuclear Project and First Information Reports have been filed against the petitioners. As regards the petitioners in W.P.(MD). Nos. 8343 to 8348 & 8350 of 2014, criminal cases have been registered in Cr. Nos. 338/2011, 397/2011, 375/2011, 377/2011, 393/2011, 375/2011 & 384/2011 respectively, for the offences under Section 143 & 188 r/w 34 IPC. So far as the petitioners in W.P.(MD). No. 8349 of 2014 is concerned, criminal case has been registered in Cr. No. 397 of 2011 for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 353 & 307 IPC. On receipt of the adverse police verification report, show cause notices were sent to the petitioners asking them to give explanation as to why they suppressed the particulars regarding the pendency of criminal cases and also to give explanation regarding the status of the criminal cases. The petitioners have given explanation stating that they were not informed by the Police about the registration of the FIRs against them. In the counter affidavits, it has been further stated by the 3rd respondent that as per the Passports Act, 1967, the passport authority shall refuse to issue a passport or travel document for visiting any foreign country under Section 6(2)(f) read with Clause (c) of sub-section (2) of Section 5 of the Passports Act 1967, on the ground that the proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the, applicants are pending before the criminal Court in India. Thus, the 3rd respondent sought for dismissal of the writ petitions.