Jitender Singh v. Superintendent Policy Regional Passport Office

ORDER

27.10.2010 l. The Petitioner questions the show cause notice dated 22nd Febmary 2010 issued by the Superintendent (Policy) f;.egional Passport Office ('RPO'), Delhi that in view o.f .the registration of FIR No. 36/2008 dated 23'd June 2008 under Sectioi 5061509 IPC & 66 of the Information .j Technology Act, 2000 against the Petitioner which is in the criminal court the Petitioner should show cause why the passport issued to him should not be revoked"under Section 10(3)(e) of the Passport Act, 1967 ('Act'). :j

¶2It appears that in relation to the above FIR, the Petitioner applied for and was granted a conditional anticipatory bail on llft December 2008 by this Court in particular requiring the Petitioner not to contact the complainant's daughter. However', the RPO received a communication from the DCP (Special Cell) Delhi on 3'd Febnrary 2010 stating that the Petitioner had violatgd. the said bail condition. ConsequenllV the impugned show cause notice was issued to the Petitioner; : II rul t I W.P.(c) No.2115/2070 Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. i *t' I

¶3The Petitioner sent a reply to the show cause notice on 16ft 2010. Subsequently, a charge sheet was filed in the Court of the Chief Mefopolitan Magistrate, Delhi in FIR No. 3612008 on 27 2010.

¶4h the considered view of this Court, the appropriate course . to be adopted is to require the Respondents to consider the Petitioner's reply to the show cause notice and after giving the Petitioner an opportunity of being heard, pass a reasoned order. t

¶5The Petitioner will appear on 22nd November 2010 at lL 00 am before the RPO. After giving the Petitioner a hearing, a reasoned order will be passed by the RPO within a period of three weeks thereafter and the said order will be communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks thereafter. If aggrieved by such order, it will be open to the Petitioner to avail of the stahrtory remedy available to the Petitioner by way of appeal, and any other remedy that may be aVailable to him in law.

¶6The petition and application are disposed of.

S. MURALIDHAR, J. OCTOBER?T,2OIO akg W.P.(c) No.2115/2010 ,:5 ft April T t'

L:\-=ts t : * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DEI,HI AT NEW DELHI #16 :' + w.P.(c) 2rrsl2010 & cM 423U20rti JITENDER SINGH Through Mr. Medhanshu Tripathi, Advocate. versus SUPERINTENDENT (POLIC Y) REGIONAI PASSPORT OFFICE ..:. Respondent Through Mr. Sachin Datta with . Ms. Giyani Verma, Advocate. : CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR