RAJINDER KAUR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rajinder Kaur and Gurdeep Kaur, wife and mother respectively, of Gurbachan Singh, have approached this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution oflndia praying that the Regional Passport Officer, Chandigarh, should be directed to issue passport to the petitioners. The action of the respondents in not issuing passports to the petitioners is entirely arbitrary and without any basis According to the petitioners they had applied for issuance of a passport as they had intention to travel abroad. For this purpose, they submitted the requisite application forms after duly complying with rules and as stated in the application on 12-3-2003. Applications of both the petitioners were received by the department against receipts Serial No. Chandigarh 00019 and Chandigarh 00015 respectively on the same date. The petitioners visited the passport office on different dates including 26-9-2003 and 17-11-2003. The passports were not issued to the petitioners and they were informed that it had been reported on the enquiry slip that police report from the Senior Superintendent of Police; Patiala, was incorrect Petitioners claim that they have never done any criminal act and they do not have any history of direct or indirect involvement of any crime. The respondents have no reason, whatsoever, to deny this relief to the petitioners. Mr. Gurbachan Singh is stated to be avoiding trial in State of Punjab and is wanted by the police and that is the basic reason why the State functionaries including the police are not quite inclined to issue the demanded passport to the petitioners. The petitioners while relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597, as well as judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Kamaljit Kaur v. Union of India CWP No. 4226 of 2001, decided on 9-10-2001 contended that they are really entitled to get the passports and the travel documents for travelling abroad in accordance with the provisions of the Passports Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act.

(2.) This petition was contested by the respondents. Two different written statements were filed. One written statement was filed on behalf of the Union of India and Regional Passport Officer together, wherein it was not disputed that application for issuance of passport was received by the Passport Office but it is averred that it is mandatory before issuance of the passport that there should be clear investigation report in terms of the instructions issued by the ernment of India dated 28-10-1999. Annexurc R. 1 to the writ petition. As per police report, Annexure R. 2 to the reply, the police authorities have not recommended issuance of passport to the petitioners on the ground that Shri Gurbachan Singh was indulging in terrorist activities and had gone abroad on a passport which he obtained by giving wrong address.

(3.) Other written statement was filed on behalf of the Deputy Superintendent of Po- lice, Samana-respondent No. 3. In the pre- liminary submissions of the written state- Govraent it has been stated that number of cases have been registered against Gurbachan Singh, the husband and son respectively of the two petitioners. There are as many as eight cases registered against him, which are pending and he is wanted in these cases. Since the petitioners also wanted to go to see Gurbachan Singh in America, therefore, it was not desirable to issue passport to them. The details of the cases registered against him are as under :