THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE,
Dated: 18th May, 2018
Sub: Providing the required clarification with satisfactory explanation Regarding the passport renewal application for issuance of Passport facilities within stipulated time limit.
Ref: Show cause notice No: SCN/1234567/18 Dated 24/05/2018 .
Respected RPO officer (RPO),
This is in reference of your show cause notice as adverse Police Verification Report corresponding to my “passport renewal application” for “passport issuance facility” with file number X135790865356 dated 24/04/2018 . And your department has been informed by the police authorities about my involvement in 498a case of pre trial stage , in this regard I would like to convey my unconditional apologies for any unintentional inconvenience that has caused to you unnecessarily.
I am MR.XXX.YYY possessing old passport bearing No: S5467783 file No. DL123098567 as got issued on 06/02/2003 and expired on 05/02/2013 , meanwhile under validation of my passport I also applied and upgraded for “emigration clearance not required” file No. 64/M/43052/07 dated 23/11/2007. Hence recently I applied for renewal of my passport bearing FILE NO: X135790865356 dated 24/04/2018 and at the time of pre police verification I discussed the issue of 498a’s FIR n charge sheet with the investigation officer and he only told and advised me that if I would receive any letter then I have to keep it (Show cause notice) safe and after getting final judgement order I need to enclose both (SCN & judgement) of them to obtain my renewed passport by applying next time. And meanwhile I received this show cause notice LETTER REF. NO: SCN/1234567/18 dated 24/05/2018.
ISSUE & CASE: Applicant is involved in cr.No.142/2014 of Dwaraka PS u/s 498-A IPC 3&4 of DP Act And it is under PT stage & CC.No.86/2015 of XIII ACMM Dwaraka Court.
SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION & CLARIFICATION:
I submit that, the adverse police verification report in the file passport renewal application bearing number XY0987656789 on dated 24/04/2018.
First of all I would like to clarify that, I approached to my one of the legal counsels at the time of filing a renewal application of passport and then he advised and suggested in this regards, renewal passport application should not be suppress the information as filing FIR and submitting charge sheet does not comes under any pendency of criminal case. And
further also my counsel knowledged me that, as per the ongoing criminal proceedings, when a person had been charged of criminal proceedings under the court of criminal procedure and taking cognizance of the same. Merely pendency of the FIR cannot be construed as pendency of criminal proceedings.
I further submitted that, merely pendency of the criminal case is not sufficient ground to reject or hold the application of the applicant. I mentioned below few citations with the judgements of honourable High courts among various states in support of my satisfactory explanation and clarification which is most suitable to my explanation. The regional passport officer mechanically look into the issuance of renewed passport to me.
Hence I did not suppress the material information before the passport authorities knowingly and intentionally about me and my family members as falsely got framed and implicated in 498a case which is still now under pre trial stage and charges have not been framed. The Criminal Court has not taken cognizance of it and charges against me and my family members have not been framed.
Thanking You for giving me an opportunity to put my explanation for your satisfactory. Further whichever information for clarification regarding issuance of passport I furnished in the before of regional passport authorities. I once again sincerely regret for the inconvenience that has caused unnecessarily.
BRIEF CASE DETAIL AND STATUS:
I and my entire family members got falsely implicated and targeted into stage managed case which is falsely fabricated that to without any proper pre and post police verification and notification and also directly got booked into this wrong FIR file of crime number 142/2014 under section 498a IPC and 3&4 DP Act of Dwaraka Police Station. I and my family members defending the criminal proceedings of this case in the court of before honourable XIII Additional Criminal Metropolitan Magistrate Court at Dwaraka and has same Honourable court listed the matter in Calender Case Number 1986/2016 . I and my family members are regularly attending the proceedings in the before of Court and strongly defending the case for the sake of justice. Still proceedings are under pre trial stage and charges have not been framed against me and my family members and till now still only accused examination of us is keep on going. Meaning to say that nothing is on track and further proceedings as per the false and baseless allegations that to without any proper evidences and proofs.
Moreover being falsely accused doesn’t mean having criminal background, we got trapped by stage manage and falsely implicated including me and my other four
- family members as my old age and patient parents into this false case. We are fighting this false case on high priority for justice purpose though this case has been filed without any proper investigation and all. This false case is wrongly framed on me and my other family members with wrong intention to harass us.
We have started preparing a draft for discharge sheet as still not any charges have been framed on anyone of us. And we may go for an appeal to quash the case. Then we may again appeal to fast track as per any necessity to move forward.
EQUIVALENT CITATIONS & LAW CASES:
- BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 13.03.2017, CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. PARTHIBAN, W.P.(MD) No.3927 of 2017 – Abdul Razik (Petitioner).
Order: This writ petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to issue passport to the petitioner by considering his application taken on file as file No.MD.2079877643917 in light of the judgement made by this Court in W.Jaihar William Vs State of Tamil Nadu, 2014 2 CWC 684.
Decision: Following the above said decision, the respondent is directed to consider the application for re-issuance of passport submitted by the petitioner without reference to the FIR lodged against him and issue passport, if he is otherwise eligible for the same. The respondent shall comply with the said direction on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
- BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.06.2017 CORAM: THE HON’BLE Mr.JUSTICE K. KALYANASUNDARAM, W.P(MD) No.6820 of 2017 – Antony Reegan (Petitioner).
Order: This writ petition is filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent to issue passport to the petitioner vide passport application file No.MD 2069949029717 dated 03.02.2017. &
Decision: In view of the above submissions of the learned counsels, this Writ Petition is disposed of, with a direction to the respondent to consider the application of the petitioner in MD2069949029717 dated 03.02.2017, in the light of the orders passed by this Court in the judgments cited supra, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 26.04.2017,
CORAM: THE HON’BLE Mr.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY, W.P.No.15224 of 2016 – Vimal Kumar (Petitioner).
Order: The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to renew his passport bearing No.F2885461 pursuant to the online application dated 01.04.2016 and letter dated 18.04.2016.
Decision: It is also made clear that the passport is being issued to the petitioner only for the purpose of producing the same before his employer, since his employer is insisting on renewed passport.
- BEFORE THE ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT HYDERABAD DATED: 19.03.1993, CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B S Reddy, CriLJ 257 1994 – Matchumari China Venkatareddy (petitioner).
Content: The duty of the police is to forward the police report after completion of investigation under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. The forwarding is done for the purpose of taking the same on record and file of the court and then only, the same is perused by the court to take cognizance of the offence. Mere forwarding without meaning it to be taken on file is not contemplated under law. If the police report is forwarded to the Magistrate for taking it on file, but if the Magistrate finds that the said report is not in consonance with S. 173(2) read with S. 173(5) Cr.P.C., he declines to take it on record and that act is only administrative and not judicial. The judiciary act commences only when the charge-sheet is in order and the Magistrate proceeds further under Chapter XVI. Unless the charge-sheet is in the official custody of the court together with its accompaniments to be furnished to the accused, it cannot be construed that there is a filing of charge-sheet. Chapter XVI relates to commencement of proceedings before Magistrates, process to be issued when Magistrate takes cognizance of the offence. The next stage is framing of charges under Chapter XVII. Next stage is trial and the eventual being the judgment.
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATED: 01.10.2015 CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU, CWP No.12143 of 2015 (O&M) – Daler Singh (Petitioner).
Order: By filing the present petition, Daler Singh – petitioner has sought direction to respondents No.1 and 2 to issue him a passport, which has been withheld on the complaint made by respondent No.3.
Decision: In view of above, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to re-issue the passport to the petitioner, if there is no other legal impediment, except the registration of the aforesaid case. However, it is directed that the manner of the use of the passport for travel outside will be subject to the orders of the appropriate criminal court of competent jurisdiction in respect of the FIR registered against the petitioner. The petitioner will himself approach the concerned Court, and seek appropriate directions to travel abroad, if he intends to use the passport for such a purpose.
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE: 01.04.2013, CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, CWP No.19361 of 2012 (O&M) – Sanjeev Sharma (Petitioner).
Order: Consequently, a mandamus would fly to the official respondents commanding them to issue a valid Indian passport to the petitioner within 14 days of supply of certified copy of this order or receipt thereof whichever is earlier.
Decision: I, therefore, have no hesitation to allow this writ petition and quash the impugned order dated 21.11.2011 (P-8) and the consequential CWP No.19361 of 2012 (O&M) order dated 30.04.2012 (P-9) issued by the Regional Passport Office, Chandigarh with costs quantified at Rs.20,000/- to be paid by the official respondents to the petitioner by way of a draft within 30 days of the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The cost would be borne by the Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi.
- BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24.03.2016, CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN, W.P(MD)No.4092 of 2016 – S.M.Shoba (Petitioner)
Order: This Writ Petition has been filed seeking issuance of a Mandamus to direct the second respondent to impound the passport of the respondents 4 and 5 in the light of section 10 of the Passport Act considering the pendency of the criminal case against respondents 4 and 5 within the stipulated time.
Decision: This Court is of the view that filing a Writ Petition seeking direction to the Passport Authority to impound the passport of the rival parties in a family dispute is nothing but a tactics has now been invented to somehow harass the other side either way. Therefore, if every case like this is started, it will put to irreparable loss to the other party unless a firm thing is made out before the Court to show that the party has violated any conditions. Impounding the passport is not an automatic and routine one and under the caption of consideration of representation the petitioner cannot think that a positive direction would be given. Therefore, this Court is not passing any order. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.
Henceforth I am praying to Regional Passport Officer with my humble request by folding hands that please do renewal and issue me a renewed passport as its a by birth right of every citizen of india to have a valid passport. By protecting my constitutional fundamental right to have an active and valid passport as my identity and hence renewal of my identity cannot be conditional.
I just wanted to get it renew as almost 5 years over after expiring of my passport and as required to have an active and valid passport for the purpose of any good job opportunities here in india where I could asked to furnish my valid and active passport towards my permanent residential proof as one of the formalities.
I request as please don’t consider me as I have suppressed the material information due to the pendency of FIR and submission of charge sheet as The Criminal Court has not taken cognizance of it and charges against me and my family members have not been framed.
I further request to review the declaration by the honourable Supreme Court in Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India. that passport is a fundamental right of every citizen. Also deprivation of livelihood would not only denude the life of its effective content and meaningfulness however it would make life impossible to live. Yet such deprivation of life would not be in accordance with the procedure established by law, if the right to livelihood is not regarded as a part of the right to life.
I strongly respect the final call by the regional passport officer’s decision for reissuing me the renewed and valid passport as per the merit of the justice.
|DATED : 18TH JUNE, 2018.||Yours sincerely,|
|PLACE : Delhi||(MR.XXX.YYY)|