N. CHANDRABABU Vs. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On the complaint lodged by Syed Sahul Ahmeer, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Trichy, Palakkari Police Station registered a case in Crime No.319 of 2013 on 04.06.2013 and after completing the investigation, filed a charge sheet in C.C.No.21 of 2015 before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Trichy for the offences under Sections 120-B, 418, 419, 420, 463, 468 and 506(i) of I.P.C., against M.A.Alaudeen (A1), Paulgeesh @ Bhuveneshwari (A2) and N.Babu @ Chandrababu (A3). Babu @ Chandrababu (A3), the petitioner herein was released on anticipatory bail in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.21389 of 2013 vide order dated 29.11.2013. Babu @ Chandrababu is an Indian citizen and he was the holder of a passport bearing No.K5703462 dated 29.07.2013. He submitted an application for re-issuance of passport based on which, he was re-issued with a passport bearing No.Z2971459, dated 03.11.2014. On subsequent verification by the Passport Authorities, it came to their notice that the above said criminal case in Crime No.319 of 2013 on the file of Palakkari Police Station is pending against the petitioner and that the case is on trial in C.C.No.21 of 2015 before the Court. According to the Passport Authorities, the petitioner had suppressed this information and obtained the re-issued passport. In this regard, a show cause notice dated 19.12.2014 was issued by the Passport Authorities to the petitioner, calling upon him to explain as to why action should not be taken against him for suppression of the factum of the pendency of the criminal case against him. In response to the show cause notice, the petitioner submitted his explanation dated 10.09.2015, stating that there was no criminal case pending against him at the time of seeking re-issuance. However, the petitioner was advised to surrender the passport pursuant to which, he surrendered the passport bearing No.Z2971459 to the Passport Authorities on 10.09.2015. Under such circumstances, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition for issuance of Writ of Mandamus to the Passport Authorities to return his passport to him as he wants to go to China on business assignment.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.

(3.) The admitted fact is that the petitioner is facing trial in C.C.No.21 of 2015 before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Trichy. It is also a fact that the petitioner has filed Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3533 of 2017, challenging the criminal prosecution in C.C.No.21 of 2015 and this Court has admitted the quash application and in Crl.M.P.(MD).No.2642 of 2017, has granted interim stay of all further proceedings in C.C.No.21 of 2015 before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Trichy. At this juncture, it may be relevant to discuss the legal position with regard to the right of a person facing criminal prosecution to demand issuance of passport. To decide this issue, it may be necessary to extract the following legal provisions from the Passports Act, 1967.