Debasish Chakraborty vs Union Of India And Others

Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J

The grievance of the petitioner is that, despite the petitioner having a valid passport and being enlarged on bail in a criminal case for the offence of

handing over fake passports to Afghan citizens, the petitioner is harassed every time he goes through the immigration checking at the Netaji Subhas

Chandra Bose International Airport at Kolkata. It is argued that, although the criminal case is still pending, there is no Look Out Circular against the

petitioner, since the previous Look Out Circular has already spent its force. As such, the petitioner complains that he is being harassed unnecessarily

by the Airport Authorities and the Officers of the Immigration Department every time the petitioner seeks to leave India and return to India via the

Kolkata Airport.

Learned counsel appearing for the State-respondents submits that, in the criminal case against the petitioner, charge-sheet has already been filed and it

is about to reach culmination.

Learned counsel appearing for the Union of India as well as the respondent nos.6 and 7 submits that the criminal case against the petitioner is still

pending, although the petitioner was enlarged on bail. As such, the Immigration Authorities have every right to question the petitioner if they are

satisfied that there is any scope of such interrogation for the safety of the country. It is further submitted that unless the criminal case is disposed of, in

any event, the petitioner cannot be absolved entirely of the charges levelled against the petitioner.

It appears from the nature of the grievances urged by the petitioner before this Court that a criminal case is pending at a mature stage against the

petitioner, where charge-sheet has already been filed and the petitioner is temporarily out on bail. Although an accused cannot be presumed to be a

convict, under the Indian Law, even then, since the petitioner is not prevented from leaving or returning to India, but allegedly being questioned only,

though for long periods, by the Immigration Authorities, it does not appear that there is any reason disclosed by the petitioner sufficient to interfere

under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Some discretion has to be left to the immigration and other security authorities in order to do their duty. As such, the Court cannot entertain, at the

drop of a hat, every allegation of people who are questioned long by the Immigration Authorities, particularly, where a criminal case is still pending

against the petitioner.

Moreover, the nature of the reliefs sought cannot be granted also, for the simple reason that the said relief cannot be enforced by the Court. The

nature of allegation is that the petitioner is sporadically harassed when he travels through the Kolkata airport, which, it is not possible for the Court to

ensure is prevented, even if the writ petition were to be allowed. As such, on the aforesaid grounds, the writ petition is not maintainable.

Accordingly, W.P. No.22635(W) of 2018 is dismissed on contest.

There will be no order as to costs.

Urgent certified website copies of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.