Cheekati Manavendranath Roy, J.:— This Writ Petition is filed seeking writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not issuing Police Clearance Certificate to obtain VISA from Brazilian Consulate to enable the petitioner to travel abroad in pursuance of his employment under Passport No. Z3696305, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Official Memorandum, dated 10.10.2019, issued by the 2 respondent apart from being gross violation of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently, to direct the respondents to issue Police Clearance Certificate to the petitioner.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents 1 to 3.
3. The petitioner has been holding an Indian Passport bearing No. Z3696305 to go abroad i.e. Brazil in pursuance of his employment. He requires Police Clearance Certificate as per the prevailing norms to enable him to apply for VISA from the Brazilian Consulate. Earlier when he has submitted an online application for issuance of Police Clearance Certificate, the 3 respondent Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada City, issued him Police Clearance Certificate, dated 26.11.2018. The petitioner has also earlier obtained a certificate from the IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada, where a case in C.C. No. 737 of 2016, in which he is an accused, was pending, whereunder, the said Court permitted the petitioner to travel to Brazil stating that he is at liberty to travel abroad with the passport No. Z3696305 until expiry of the same passport i.e. till 26.04.2026. It appears that the VISA which was earlier granted to the petitioner by the Brazilian Consulate expired. Therefore, he has to apply again for grant of VISA. So, he requires the Police Clearance Certificate again for the purpose of obtaining the said VISA. Accordingly, the petitioner has applied for the said Police Clearance Certificate. However, it appears that the respondents are not complying with his request and they are not issuing any Police Clearance Certificate to enable the petitioner to obtain VISA from the Brazilian Consulate.
4. Therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the present Writ Petition seeking the aforesaid relief.
5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner is an accused in C.C. No. 737 of 2016 on the file of the IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada, and he is facing prosecution for the offences shown in the charge-sheet in the said case. Therefore, during pendency of the said case and without a certificate obtained by the petitioner from the said Court permitting him to go abroad that the said Police Clearance Certificate cannot be issued again at this stage.
6. This Court do not find any substance in the contention of the respondents. The above criminal case has been pending against the petitioner since 2016 as the same is numbered as C.C. No. 737 of 2016. During the pendency of the said case itself, the trial Court issued a certificate dated 07.12.2018 permitting the petitioner to travel abroad i.e. Brazil and also stated in the said certificate that the petitioner is at liberty to travel abroad with the passport No. Z3696305 until expiry of the same passport i.e. till 26.04.2026. The 3 respondent also issued Police Clearance Certificate during pendency of the said case on 26.11.2018. Therefore, when the 3 respondent has earlier issued Police Clearance Certificate despite the fact that the said criminal case is pending against the petitioner, it is really beyond the comprehension of this Court as to how the 3 respondent could refuse to entertain the request of the petitioner for issuance of the Police Clearance Certificate now on the ground that the said criminal case is pending against the petitioner. Therefore, there is no merit in the said contention and there is also no justification on the part of the respondent police officials in refusing to issue any such Police Clearance Certificate on the alleged ground that the criminal case is pending against the petitioner.
7. Further, the legal position in this regard is also not an undecided question of law. The Kerala High Court in the case of Dr. Shahul Hameed Aboobacker v. Regional Passport Officer Judgment dated 08.08.2016 in W.P. (C) No. 25839 of 2016 (D) held while deciding the similar question that the petitioner therein is entitled for issuance of Police Clearance Certificate when there is no adverse information available to the police against him which makes him ineligible for grant of Police Clearance Certificate.
8. In the instant case, it is not the case of the respondent police officials that there is any adverse information against the petitioner which makes him ineligible for issuance of the Police Clearance Certificate. As already noticed supra they are now not inclined to grant any such Police Clearance Certificate only on the ground that the criminal case is pending against the petitioner which was not made a ground earlier for refusal of issuing Police Clearance Certificate.
9. Therefore, when there is no adverse information against the petitioner available with the police, which disentitles him to have the Police Clearance Certificate and when the production of the Police Clearance Certificate is mandatory for the petitioner to apply for VISA from the Brazilian Consulate, there is absolutely no justification on the part of the respondent police officials in not entertaining the request of the petitioner for issuance of Police Clearance Certificate.
10. Therefore, the Writ Petition is allowed directing the 3 respondent Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada City, to consider the request made by the petitioner for issuance of the Police Clearance Certificate and if there is no adverse information against the petitioner available with the police which disentitles him to have any such certificate, to issue the said Police Clearance Certificate within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order or from the date on which copy of this order is produced by the petitioner before the 3 respondent, whichever is earlier. No costs.
11. The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
Comments