AJAY KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of mandamus seeking directions to respondent No. 3-Commissioner of Police to issue ''No Objection Certificate" to the passport authorities regarding the FIRs registered against the petitioner as due to wrong information given by the police to the Regional Passport Office, Jalandhar-respondent No. 2, that the petitioner has been convicted for two years imprisonment in a case, the Regional Passport Officer, Jalandhar is not issuing the passport to the petitioner.

(2.) In brief, the petitioner has alleged that he was holding a valid passport No. E4395727 issued on 17.4.2003 which was expired on 16.4.2013. He thereafter, applied for renewal of the passport vide passport file No. JA2070705085412. It is alleged that the Jalandhar police has given a wrong information to the Regional Passport Office, Jalandhar that since the petitioner has been convicted for two years, therefore, he cannot be issued a fresh passport and as such respondent No.2 has served a notice to the petitioner on 16.1.2014 asking him to give explanation as to why the request for renewal of passport be not declined because the petitioner has been allegedly convicted during the last five years and sentenced to imprisonment for a period of two years or more.

(3.) The petitioner gave his explanation/reply dated 22.10.2014 (Annexure P-3) through an advocate but still no action was taken by the respondents and therefore, the petitioner has filed the present petition. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that respondent No. 2 can refuse to issue passport only in terms of Section 6(2) (e) of the Passport Act 1967 (for short 'the Act'). It is also submitted that respondent No. 3 has only provided the information to respondent No.2 that there are about nine FIRs registered against the petitioner but it is admitted that they have no information about the sentence of the petitioner for two years or more.