Judgment · High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh

#2. The Regional Passport Officer, Jammu, Regional Passport Office, First Floor, Auqaf Building, Opposite Gandhi Nagar Hospital, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu.

#3. The Senior Superintendent of Police, CID Special Branch, Canal Road, Jammu.

#4. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Udhampur, District Police Office, M.H Chowk, Udhampur.

#5. The Station House Officer, Police Station, Chenani. ….Respondent(s) Through :- Mr. Vishal Sharma, DSGI for R-1&2. Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG for R-3 to 5. CORAM HON’BLE MS.JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE ORDER 28.04.2025

#1. Petitioner, by way of instant petition, seeks a direction upon respondent Nos. 1&2 to issue passport in his favour in pursuance of his application registered as File No. JM2067672485623. Additionally, the 2 WP(C) No.941/2025 petitioner has also sought a direction upon respondent Nos. 3 to 5 to issue and submit passport verification report to respondent No.2 in light of order dated

05.04.2023, passed by this Court in the petition filed by the petitioner being CRM(M) No.275/2023, whereby the Station House Officer, Police Station Chenani has been directed not to produce the chargesheet against the petitioner in FIR No.30/2023.

#2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has applied for passport and his application was processed by the respondents by assigning File No.JM2067672485623, however, the same was not considered due to the adverse verification report submitted by respondent No.5-Station House Officer, Police Station, Chenani against the petitioner in respect of alleged offence in case FIR No.30/2023.

#3. It is further submitted that the petitioner has preferred CRM(M) No.275/2023 seeking quashment of FIR No.30/2023, registered against him under Sections 336/431/504/506/427/34 IPC, with Police Station Chenani, wherein this Court after hearing learned counsel for the petitioner had directed respondent No.5 not to file charge-sheet against the petitioner without seeking permission from the Court. According to the learned counsel, the aforesaid petition is still pending consideration before this Court.

#4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the representation dated 08.04.2025, has been filed by the petitioner before respondent No.2-Regional Transport Officer, Jammu, requesting therein for issuance of passport in his favour on the ground that the petitioner intends to go for Haj pilgrimage along with spouse but his request has not been acceded to by the respondent No.2 till date. 3 WP(C) No.941/2025

#6. Issue notice to the respondents. Mr. Vishal Sharma, learned DSGI, accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1&2 and Ms. Monika Kohli, learned Sr. AAG accepts notice on behalf of the respondent Nos. 3 to 5.

#7. It is submitted by Mr. Vishal Sharma, learned DSGI appearing on behalf of respondents No. 1 & 2 that the passport authority has to consider the processing of passport in favour of the petitioner subject to police verification. It is also stated that in view of the court cases being pending against the petitioner the requirement of NOC/Permission from the trial Court is required and in case the petitioner makes available his requisite NOC/Permission from the trial Court, matter would be processed further.

#8. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondents, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this petition be disposed of, at this stage, permitting the petitioner to place on record the NOC/Permission as required from the trial court to the passport authority for further consideration of the matter. Learned counsel for the respondents is not averse to the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner for disposal of the petition at this stage.

#9. Accordingly, this petition is, disposed of, at its threshold, in view of the consensus reached at between the learned counsel for both the sides, with a direction to the respondent-authorities to accord consideration in the matter with regard to issuance of passport in favour of the petitioner on filing of all the requisite documents including NOC/Permission from the trial court where the petitioner has been facing prosecution in some criminal case(s). 4 WP(C) No.941/2025

#10. It is, however, expected that in view of the urgency shown by the petitioner as he has to proceed for Haj Pilgrimage, the respondents are expected to decide the matter expeditiously preferably within a period of one month from the date of submission of NOC/Permission from the trial court in accordance with law.

#11. The present petition is, accordingly, disposed of, along with connected application. Jammu: 28.04.2025 Surinder (Moksha Khajuria Kazmi) Judge Whether the order is speaking: Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No Yes/No Surinder Kumar 2025.04.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document