The mere pendency of criminal cases against a person is not a ground to refuse renewal or demand surrender of a passport.

JUDGMENT :

D.V.S.S. SOMAYAJULU, J.

1. This Writ Petition is filed seeking a mandamus questioning the action of the 2 respondent in retaining the petitioner's passport bearing No. Z6412398 vide surrender Certificate dated 01.12.2021.

2. This Court has heard Sri. K. Chidambaram, learned counsel for the petitioner. He points out that the petitioner is the Chairman of a private medical college. He had a passport, which was valid till March, 2022. Thereafter, he made an application for renewal of the passport, and a new passport bearing No. Z6412398 was issued to the petitioner on 03.09.2021. The petitioner travelled abroad with his new passport and returned to India in the month of November, 2021. A show cause notice was issued to the petitioner stating that the respondents received an adverse police verification report against him. At request of respondents, the petitioner surrendered his passport on 01.12.2021 and the same was acknowledged by the 2 respondent vide surrender certificate dated 01.12.2021. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues on the basis of case law that the existence of the criminal cases is not a ground to seek surrender of the passport or not to renew the passport. Learned counsel submits that Section 6 of the Passport Act deals with the initial issue of passports and does not deal with the “renewal” of existing passport. He relies upon the judgments of the Karnataka and Delhi High Courts, which are reported in W.P. No. 9141 of 2020 of Karnataka High Court and Crl. Appeal No. 686 of 2018 of High Court of Delhi, and the judgment of the Supreme Court of India in Criminal Appeal No. 1342 of 2017. Learned counsel argues that in that case before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India the person was convicted of an offence and the conviction was stayed. Even then the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that renewal of a passport cannot be kept pending. Learned counsel, therefore, argues that the respondents cannot retain the renewed passport or demand its surrender only on the ground that there are adverse police cases against the petitioner.

3. In reply to this Sri. Krishna Bushan Chowdary, learned counsel for the 2 respondent, argues that action taken by the respondents is correct. He points out that there are at least four cases pending trial against the petitioner and the 5 case is under investigation. All of these are listed in paragraph 4 of the counter affidavit. Learned counsel submits that this is a case of suppression of information, since the petitioner did not bring these facts to the notice of the authorities when he sought for renewal. He also argues that the petitioner surrendered his passport. The last submission of the learned counsel is that the passport can be processed only under the GSR 570(E). He draws the attention of this Court to the judgments passed by the coordinate Benches of this Court in W.P. No. 17993 of 2021 to argue that similar procedure must be followed.

4. This Court after hearing both the learned counsel notices that the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in Criminal Appeal No. 1342 of 2017, was dealing with a person, who was convicted by the Court and his appeal is pending for decision in the Supreme Court. The conviction was however stayed. In those circumstances also it was held that the passport authority cannot refuse the “renewal” of the passport.

5. This Court also holds that merely because a person is an accused in a case it cannot be said that he cannot “hold” or possess a passport. As per our jurisprudence every person is presumed innocent unless he is proven guilty. Therefore, the mere fact that a criminal case is pending against the person is not a ground to conclude that he cannot possess or hold a passport. Even under Section 10(d) of the Passports Act, the passport can be impounded only if the holder has been convicted of an offence involving “moral turpitude” to imprisonment of not less than two years. The use of the conjunction ‘and’ makes it clear that both the ingredien