Punjab

Faridkot

CC/19/95

KUldeep Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Regional Passport Officer - Opp.Party(s)

Rajinder Singh Romana

24 Sep 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT

Complaint No. :        95 of 2019

Date of Institution:    04.04.2019

Date of Decision :     24.09.2019

 

Kuldeep Singh s/o Jagsir Singh son of Sher Singh r/o Village Dana Romana, Tehsil and District Faridkot.

 

...........Complainant

Versus

 

 

 Regional Passport Office, Sri Amritsar Sahib, SCO No.110, 2^nd- 4^th Floor, Raj Tower, District Shopping Centre, Ranjit Avenue, Sri Amritsar Sahib.

............OP

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

Quorum: Sh Ajit Aggarwal, President,

     Smt Param Pal Kaur, Member.

Present: Sh Rajinder Singh Romana, Ld Counsel for complainant,

    OP Exparte.

ORDER

 (Ajit Aggarwal, President)

                                               Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986  against OP seeking directions to them to release passport in his name and to pay compensation for mental agony and harassment suffered by him.

2                                              Briefly stated the case of complainant is that he applied before OP for issuance of Passport vide File

cc no.-95 of 2019

No.AS1061621903217, but after conduction of Police verification, he did not receive any response from OP side. It is further submitted that FIRNo.55 dated 21.05.2010 was registered in Police Station Sadar, Kotkapura against complainant on false statement given by Jarnail Kaur wife of Jalour Singh resident of Village Dana Romana, which after verification by Police was found false and incorrect and concerned Police Station submitted cancellation report regarding said FIR to Illaqua Magistrate, which was again sent for verification by Illaqua Magistrate. After reinvestigating the matter, said cancellation report was further sent to Illaqua Magistrate, Faridkot, but meanwhile, during the course of these proceedings, petitioner  Jarnail Kaur died and as per status report of said FIR, case was disposed off. Though FIR was already cancelled against complainant and he is totally innocent in that case, but even then, OP have not issued passport to him. Act of OP in not issuing passport to complainant amounts to deficiency in service and it has caused harassment and mental agony to him. He has prayed for compensation for harassment suffered by him and litigation expenses besides the main relief. Hence, the present complaint.

3

                                                The Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 9.04.2018, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the OP.

 

 

cc no.-95 of 2019

4                                                  Despite service of notice issued by this Forum, no body appeared in the Forum on date fixed and therefore, vide order dated 10.06.2019, OP was proceeded against exparte.

 

5                                              Complainant party was given proper opportunities to prove its case. Ld Counsel for complainant tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant Ex C-1 and documents Ex C-2 to C-4 and then, closed the evidence.

6                                             There is no rebuttal from OP side therefore, we have heard the arguments and also gone through the pleadings and evidence led by complainant. The case of the complainant is that he had applied for the passport but the passport authorities did not give any response for issuance of passport to him. It is found that  a criminal case was registered against him whereas he pleaded that he is completely innocent and no criminal case is pending against him. There is no rebuttal from opposite side as Opposite Party is exparte in present complaint. However, for proper adjudication of matter and for just decision of case, complete record of FIR No.55 dated 21.05.2010 was summoned from MHC, Sadar Police Station, Kotkapura. In compliance of notice issued by this Forum, Head Constable No.1175, Faridkot namely  Sukhdev Singh appeared in the Forum alongwith record of FIR No. 55 dated 21.05.2010. He brought before the Forum that on complaint by Jarnail Kaur now deceased,  a case under section 452/323/324/325/307/148 and 149 IPC

cc no.-95 of 2019

was registered against one Teja Singh and others including complainant Kuldeep Singh vide FIR No.55 dated 21.05.2010 and he placed before the Forum cancellation report regarding same ExC-4. As per Cancellation Report, status of said FIR stands disposed off. Cancellation Report is self explanatory and clearly shows that no case is pending against complainant.  

7                                              The Counsel for the complainant put reliance on the order passed by our Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in CWP no.13863 of 2014 ( O & M) titled as Kulwant Rai Kataria Vs Verification officer, Regional Passport office, Amritsar and others in it our Hon’ble Lordship observed that Right to travel is important ingredient of freedom of movement and the restriction has to be by law for appropriate reasons. The Passport Act contains the provisions that regulates a person, who is guilty of a criminal offence, from obtaining a passport and the issue will stand therefore regulated by the means mentioned under the Passport Act. While no person can claim that he has absolute right of freedom to travel, the fetter has to be made on sufficient reasons recognized by law. In this case, the criminal offence admittedly attributed relating to the incident of the year 2010 and even the investigation is not complete. It is not as if the case is pending trial and is coming anywhere close to its conclusion. Incidents of the year 2010 and 2011 are lingering. When there have been initially reports for cancellation of the complaint, that itself be a justification to secure the passport

cc no.-95 of 2019

without any objection. The issuance of a passport will still be subject to the control of Court about the document could be put to use and the Magistrate will be within his competence to issue appropriate direction about the conditions that could be imposed for travel outside India. The State is therefore directed to give appropriate recommendations in the light of the directions issued by this Court that make liable the Passport office to issue the passport.

8                                                We are fully convinced with the evidence, pleadings, arguments and case law produced by the Counsel for the complainant. The complainant succeeds in proving this case, so the present complaint in hand is allowed. The Opposite Party is hereby ordered to issue passport to complainant within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Compliance be made within one month within prescribed period failing which complainant shall be entitled to initiate proceedings under Section 25 and 27 of Consumer Protection Act. Copy of the order be supplied to parties free of cost as per law. File be consigned

to the record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated: 24.09.2017        

(Param Pal Kaur)                    (Ajit Aggarwal)

Member                         President