SHAFKETH RASOOL BABA Vs. STATE AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Held: that it is not permissible under law that when "A" has committed a crime, "B" should be punished. In the instant case, respondents have taken a definite stand that there is nothing adverse in the CID records against the petitioner. Thus keeping in view the ratio laid down by the apex court and this court coupled with mandate of Clause-C of sub-clause (2) of Section 6 of the Passport Act, read with the reply filed by respondents, the action of respondents in denying passport to the petitioner is illegal and violative of mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In the given circumstances, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for grant/issuance of passport in terms of the rules occupying the field within one month from the date the copy of this order is served upon the respondents.

(2.) Respondents 1 and 2 have averred in their reply that the filed staff/agency has reported that cousin of the petitioner, namely, Mohammad Shafi Baba S/O Ghulam Mohammad Baba R/O Shinkipora Sopore is undergoing arms training at Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK) for carrying out subversive activities in J&K State.

(3.) Respondents 3 and 4 have also averred in the reply that in view of the report of the CID Hqr., the passport officer has not issued passport in favour of the petitioner.