Criminal Antecedents Of Family Members Can't Be Taken Into Account To Assess Applicant's Character For Issuing Passport: MP High Court
In a recent ruling, the Indore Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court held that criminal antecedents of family members cannot be taken into account in assessing applicant's character and application for the issuance of passport.The single-judge bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar observed, “…the impugned order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law as the petitioner also enjoys all the...
In a recent ruling, the Indore Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court held that criminal antecedents of family members cannot be taken into account in assessing applicant's character and application for the issuance of passport.
The single-judge bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar observed, “…the impugned order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law as the petitioner also enjoys all the fundamental rights as any other citizen of this Country, and the criminal antecedents of her husband and father-in-law cannot be taken into account to assess her character and her application for issuance of passport, as the respondents are required to pass the order only on the basis of the petitioner's character verification, and not that of her husband or father-in-law's criminal antecedents.”
In the present case, the grievance of the petitioner was that despite being entitled to obtain a passport to travel abroad, the Regional Passport Authority rejected her application on the ground that her husband and father-in-law were offenders under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and other offences, and her father-in-law is still absconding in many cases. Therefore, since she had a criminal family background, she was not recommended for issuance of passport.
A co-ordinate bench of the High Court in a writ petition (W.P. No.10154/2021) filed by the petitioner had earlier directed the respondents to decide the petitioner's application afresh without taking into account the grounds of earlier rejection. However, respondents again communicated to the petitioner through the impugned order dated 17.11.2022, that she cannot be issued the passport on account of the pre police verification, which is non-recommendatory.
The counsel for the petitioner submitted that despite a specific order being passed by the High Court, the respondents again passed the same order and therefore, the impugned order deserves to be quashed.
Additional Solicitor General submitted that on account of the criminal background of the petitioner, as her husband and father-in law have indulged in cases relating to Narcotic drugs, she is also denied the facility of passport. However, he conceded that there are no criminal cases registered against the petitioner herself.
The court said that in W.P. No.10154/2021, the respondents were specifically directed not to consider the grounds, on the basis of which, the earlier application of the petitioner was rejected. However, the respondents did not comply with the order passed by the Court in its true letter and spirit, and passed the impugned order in a "cavalier manner".
The court concluded that the impugned order that rejected petitioner's application on the ground of criminal antecedents of family members cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.
Thus, it allowed the present petition and the impugned was set aside, with a direction to the respondents to re-assess the petitioner's case within four weeks' time and pass the appropriate order in accordance with law.
Case Title: Farzana Bano versus Union of India And Others, Writ Petition No. 10503 Of 2023
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (MP) 306