IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M.NAGAPRASANNA, J.
Rahul Jashnani S/o Late Chander Jashnani - Appellant
Vs.
Union Of India - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 12514 Of 2025 (GM-PASS)
Decided On : 02-05-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's status and passport application. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. arguments from both parties regarding passport issuance. (Para 2 , 4) |
RDER :
M.NAGAPRASANNA, J.
The petitioner is before this Court seeking a direction by issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to renew the petitioner’s passport for a period of 10 years or alternatively issue a No Objection / clearance intimation to the petitioner to travel to Dubai.
2. Heard Sri P.N.Lakshmi Sagar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Shanthi Bhushan H., learned Deputy Solicitor General of India for the respondents.
3. The petitioner is a holder of an Indian passport and is presently residing in Dubai for business purpose. He gets embroiled in a crime in which the police filed a charge sheet, which is pending in C.C.No.1149/2022 for offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the IPC. The said proceeding is called in question by the petitioner before this Court in Crl.P.No.6024/2023. This Court, by its order dated 25.07.2023, stayed further proceedings before the concerned Court in C.C.No.1149/2022.
4. In the interregnum, the petitioner wanting to get his passport renewed for a period of 10 years, which would be a normal validity passport, submits an application and the same is not taken note of on the score of “a policy remarks”. The policy remarks according to the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India are pendency of criminal case in the aforesaid C.C.No.1149/2022 and would submit that in an identical issue, this Court has answered the issue in the lis in the case of SANTHOSH BEEJADI SRINIVASA VS. UNION OF INDIA , MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, [W.P.No.19203/2021 D.D.04.12.2024]. It reads as follows:
"7. ………..In furtherance thereof, the issue that falls for my consideration is:
“Whether pendency of a criminal case would bar issuance or renewal/re-issuance of a passport to a citizen of this nation?”
8. To consider the aforesaid issue, it would become necessary to notice certain provisions of the Passports Act, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short). The relevant provisions that are germane to be noticed are Sections 2 (e), 3, 5, 6, 7, 10 and 22 of the Act and they read as follows:
“2. Definitions.—In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,—
… … …
(e) “travel document” means a travel document issued or deemed to have been issued under this Act.
3. Passport or travel document for departure from India.—No person shall depart from, or attempt to depart from, India unless he holds in this behalf a valid passport or travel document.
Explanation.—For the purposes of this section,—
(a) “passport” includes a passport which having been issued by or under the authority of the Government of a foreign country satisfies the conditions prescribed under the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 (34 of 1920), in respect of the class of passports to which it belongs;
(b) “travel document” includes a travel document which having been issued by or under the authority of the Government of a foreign country satisfies the conditions prescribed.
… … …
5. Applications for passports, travel documents, etc., and orders thereon.—(1) An application for the issue of a passport under this Act for visiting such foreign country or countries (not being a named foreign country) as may be specified in the application may be made to the passport authority and shall be accompanied bysuch fee as may be prescribed to meet the expenses incurred on special security paper, printing, lamination and other connected miscellaneous services in issuing passports and other travel documents.
Explanation.—In this section, ‘named foreign country’ means such foreign country as the Central Government may, by rules made under this Act, specify in this behalf.
(1-A) An application for the issue of—
(i) a passport under this Act for visiting a named foreign country; or (ii) a travel document under this Act, for visiting such foreign country or countries (including a named foreign cou

SANTHOSH BEEJADI SRINIVASA VS. UNION OF INDIA
ASHOK KHANNA v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION v. ASHOK KHANNA
KADAR VALLI SHAIK v. UNION OF INDIA
Pending criminal proceedings can bar the renewal of a passport under the Passports Act, necessitating compliance with statutory provisions and court permissions for validity.
The denial of passport renewal due to pending criminal proceedings is justified under Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967, applicable to all forms of passport issuance.
Pendency of criminal proceedings bars the re-issuance of a passport under Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967; exceptions are subject to specific court orders.
Ongoing criminal proceedings can bar regular passport issuance under Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, while allowing for a short validity passport contingent on court approval.
The court clarified that individuals facing criminal proceedings can obtain passport renewals based on trial court permits, without needing a separate order to depart from India, affirming the limita....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.