No Need for Trial Courts Permission to Renew Passport When Criminal Proceedings Are Stayed By Higher Court
Case: Kasturi Rajupeta V. Union Of India
Coram: Justice Krishna S Dixit
Case No: Writ Petition No.19203 Of 2021
Court Observation: “This petition succeeds. A Writ of Certiorari issued quashing the impugned Endorsement. A Writ of Mandamus issues to the 3rd respondent-Regional Passport Officer to consider petitioner’s subject application in light of the observations hereinabove made and without insisting upon any order from the Criminal Court concerned. Time for compliance is six weeks.”
“However, justice of the case warrants a stipulation by this Court that petitioner shall not travel abroad without leave of the Criminal Court concerned, regardless of she being issued or not issued the passport.”
“That being the position, the respondent- RPO is not justified in asking the petitioner to go to the Trial the learned Trial Judge to seek permission to travel aboard in the ‘stayed proceedings’.”
“The Notification dated 25.08.1993 purportedly issued under Section 22 of the Act, normally expects an order of the kind and this norm is applicable in ordinary circumstances, in the sense that the criminal proceedings are not stayed and hands of the Trial Judge are free to work, and not in the circumstances that have tied his hands. A contention to the contrary amounts to asking the citizen to do an impossible act.”
“When all further proceedings in the criminal case are interdicted by a higher Court, this Notification cannot be pressed into service to deny petitioner’s request for renewal/re-issuance of passport, only on the ground that a criminal case is pending. What is to be seen is the intent, content & invocability of the Notification. Otherwise, it amounts to burying the spirit of law by operating its black letter.”
“Merely because a criminal proceeding is said to be pending, the obtainment of permission from the Court concerned does not become imperative regardless of the circumstances.”
“The provisions of Section 6(2)(f) employing the expression “proceedings … are pending before a criminal court” have to be liberally construed keeping in view other specific scenario mentioned in the companion clauses of the said sub-section.”
“The observations made by a Co-ordinate Bench in its interim order in petitioner’s W.P.No.14431/2020 about furnishment of her travel itinerary itself can be construed as the permission contemplated under the 1993 Notification. There is no need for one more order at the hands of Trial Magistrate more particularly when no specific format is legally prescribed.”
“Courts are meant for doing real justice to the causes brought before them and they cannot turn away the aggrieved parties by quoting some constitutional theories, when justice is apparently due to them.”
Previous Posts
Supreme Court Dismisses Banks Application To Recall Judgment Which Directed RBI To Disclose Loan Defaulters List, Inspection Reports Under RTI Download Judgement
Keywords
Renew Passport, Criminal Proceedings, Renew Passport during Criminal Proceedings
