Passport | Police Verification Only To Ascertain Genuineness Of Documents, Applicant Cannot Suffer Indefinitely For Its Inaction: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has held that during the ‘police verification’ process for the issuance of passport, the responsibility of the police is limited to ascertaining the genuineness of documents produced for verification by the applicant, and that the applicant should not be made to suffer indefinitely for inaction by the police authorities.

In allowing a writ-petition, directing the police authorities to expeditiously conclude the verification process of the petitioner’s birth certificate, a single-bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharya held:

"It transpires from the annexure at page-17, regarding Passport Verification Status that the list of documents to be submitted at the Police Station for police verification only requires two of the documents, as stated therein, to be produced as citizenship proof. Since the petitioner has already submitted more than two such documents, no further documents are required to be furnished by the petitioner with the police authorities. The lookout of the Police is only to ascertain whether the documents produced by the petitioner are genuine. The petitioner cannot suffer indefinitely for such inaction on the part of the Police authorities. Accordingly, WPA No. 16452 of 2023 is allowed, thereby directing the respondent no.2-authorities to immediately ascertain as to the outcome of the e-mail allegedly sent to the respondent no.3-authorities, with regard to the verification of the birth certificate produced by the petitioner.”

It was argued that the petitioner had earlier applied for a passport and submitted the necessary documentation, including a birth certificate issued by the Ranchi Municipal Corporation (respondent no 3) , which had already been sent for verification by the police authorities to the aforesaid corporation through e-mail.

It was submitted that despite having furnished all documents, the police authorities had not completed their verification of the birth certificate, leading to the petitioner’s passport not yet being issued.

It was submitted by the State Respondents that the Officer-in-charge of the concerned police station had filed a police report upon intimation by the Security Control Office (SCO), whereby they had asked the petitioner to visit the SCO’s office because the documents submitted by the petitioner were “insufficient of Citizenship”, and as such the petitioner was required to visit the office of the SCO “with all documents” in furtherance of the process.

Upon noting that such a reference to the SCO office was “vague”, the Court concluded by observing that in the process of verifying the genuineness of the petitioner’s birth certificate, it would be the onus of the police authorities to “ascertain with immediacy” the outcome of their e-mail sent to the respondent municipal authorities. It held:

“The vague reference to the “SCO Office” has not even been explained by learned counsel for the State-respondent. It also appears from the report of the Police, as rightly pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner that an e-mail has already been sent by the concerned police station to the Ranchi Municipal Corporation for verification of birth certificate of the petitioner. Hence, it is for the respondent no. 2-authority to ascertain with immediacy as to the outcome of such email, sent to the Ranchi Municipal Corporation, that is, the respondent no.3. The entire exercise shall be completed by the respondent nos. 2 and 3 within a fortnight from the date of communication of this order.”

Case: Shivani Mishra Vs. The Union of India and others

Coram: Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharya

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 198

Click Here To Read/Download Order