The petitioner, a citizen, is calling in question the endorsement dated 12.02.2018 issued by the respondent herein at Annexure-D whereby in effect he has been denied a passport on the ground that he was involved in Crime No.64/2017 of Bhatkal Town Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 409, 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. After service of notice, learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel, Mr. Narayan V.Yaji, having appeared for the respondent, opposes the writ petition submitting that though not at the time of filing of the application for the passport, later this crime is registered and that the same could have been notified to the Passport Office since that is the minimum fairness : 3 : expected of the citizen; this having not been done, the impugned order cannot be faltered.
3. The Apex Court in the case of Smt. Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India and another reported in AIR 1978 SC 597 has held that the right to travel abroad is part of Article 21 of the Constitution of India; a passport being a pre-condition for going abroad, there cannot be arbitrary denial of passport. That apart, the application for grant of passport was made on 11.04.2017, whereas the crime in question was registered by the Bhatkal Police later on 27.04.2017. Thus, the petitioner could not dream in advance that, in future, somebody would file a First Information Report against him. Therefore, the ground stated in the impugned order is unsustainable.
4. The Apex Court in the case of Mohinder Singh Gill and Another Vs. The Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi and Others, reported in (1978)1 SCC 405 has held that the validity of a : 4 : statutory order should be adjudged on the ground stated therein and not any other ground that may be supplied by way of affidavit or objection statement latter. Thus, the only ground stated by the Passport Officer having been found fault with, petitioner needs to be granted relief at the hands of this Court. In the above circumstances, this writ petition succeeds; a Writ of Certiorari issues quashing the impugned endorsement dated 12.02.2018 issued by the respondent herein at Annexure-D; a Writ of Mandamus issues to the respondent to process the application of the petitioner for reissue of passport within a period of two weeks. No costs. Sd/- JUDGE