High CourtsSingle Bench(2025) 02 KAR CK 0886

Ransom Anselm Murray vs M/S Union Of India Through Secretary To The Govt. Of India, Ministry Of External Affairs, South Block, New Delhi - 110001 & Ors.

Karnataka High Court, Principal Bench · Decided on 14 February 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
M. Nagaprasanna, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 923 Of 2025 (GM-RES)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 451 words

R Devdas, J

1.

The petitioner who is an Anglo Indian holding British Passport is before this Court seeking writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to travel to United Kingdom for limited period of time by considering the petitioner's representation dated 15.11.2024 at Annexure-A.

2.

Learned Deputy Solicitor General of India has drawn the attention of this Court to Annexure A, which is a representation given by the petitioner to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch C.I.D., Metro Wing-II, Egmore, Chennai and the Union of India through its Secretary to the Govt. of India, Ministry of External Affairs. The learned DSG would therefore submit that the petitioner could not have filed the petition before this Court having given a representation to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Chennai. Further, the learned DSG has today furnished a copy of communication dated 24.12.2024 made by the Superintendent of Police, North Zone, Crime Branch CID, Chennai to the Foreigner Regional Registration Officer, Bureau of Immigration (MHA), Government of India and submits that as per the directions of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras, the passport of the petitioner was returned to him on 03.08.2022. Further, passport as well as VISA has expired on 05.12.2023 and 10.11.2024 respectively. It is further stated that unless a no objection certificate is obtained by the petitioner at the hands of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, who is dealing with Crl.MP.No.7547/2024, exit permit cannot be given to the petitioner.

3.

Learned DSG would therefore submit that the petitioner is required to file an application before the concerned Magistrate and seek orders to permit the petitioner to travel out side India or leave the jurisdiction of the Court.

4.

Learned DSG submits that writ petition may be disposed of directing the petitioner to file necessary application before the concerned Magistrate, obtain an NOC and thereafter, if further directions are required, he may approach the High Court of Madras and not this Court, since the arrest of the petitioner was made only at the instance of the Superintendent of Police, Chennai.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to approach the concerned Magistrate, obtain NOC and thereafter, approach the High court of Madras, if any further orders are necessary.

6.

The learned DSG is requested to furnish copy of the communication dated 24.12.2024 made by the Superintendent of Police, to the learned counsel for the petitioner.

7.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate to obtain NOC and if required, approach the High Court of Madras for further direction. Having regard to the urgency, concerned Magistrate may also consider disposal of the application at the earliest.