The right to travel abroad is a fundamental right under Article 21, and cannot be denied solely due to pending criminal proceedings.

Order :

1. By way of filing the instant misc. petition, the petitioner is seeking direction of this Court to permit him to go abroad Kuwait for earning his livelihood.

2. The petitioner has moved an application before learned Magistrate which came to be decided on 04.02.2025. The petitioner was married to one Smt. Farida Bano in the year 2011. Since then, he was doing labouring job in Kuwait. He frequently used to visit the country and to take care of his wife and other family members. Owing to some discord or may be of some acrimony between them, she lodged an FIR No.368/2024 on 27.07.2024 for offence under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 494, 143 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act on March, 2019. He visited the country on 12.08.2024 to settle down the family dispute but could not get success. In a subsequent development, his wife moved an application for issuance of look out circular and in pursuance thereof, he was arrested on 09.01.2025. He was bailed out in preventive actions so also in relation to the offence relatable to the FIR No.368/2024. It is contended that he would lose job in Kuwait which he was pursuing since a long, the only source of his livelihood. It is stated that the criminal prosecution is on its nascent stage and it would surely take a long time to reach on a legitimate conclusion. During the pendency and conclusion of the trial if he would not be allowed to go outside the country, then he will lose his job. It is contended that right to go abroad and right to earn for livelihood is a fundamental right.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the niceties of the matter.

4. This Court has dealt with the similar issue in the case of Balkaran Singh v. State of Rajasthan [S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 7824/2022] dated 21.11.2022. The relevant paragraphs of the order are being reproduced herein below:-

“It is significant to note here that the Passports Act, 1967 does not confer absolute power upon a citizen to obtain passport. Section 6(1) & (2) of the Act prescribe certain conditions/eventualities when the passport authority is required to turn down request to make an endorsement or issue passport which includes a condition when an applicant is an accused in a criminal case. Relevant extract of section6(2) is reproduced hereinbelow:-

“(2) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the passport authority shall refuse to issue a passport or travel document for visiting any foreign country under clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section 5 on any one or more of the following grounds, and on no other ground, namely:—

(a) that the applicant is not a citizen of India;

(b) that the applicant may, or is likely to, engage outside India in activities prejudicial to the sovereignty and integrity of India;

(c) that the departure of the applicant from India may, or is likely to, be detrimental to the security of India;

(d) that the presence of the applicant outside India may, or is likely to, prejudice the friendly relations of India with any foreign country;

(e) that the applicant has, at any time during the period of five years immediately preceding the date of his application, been convicted by a court in India for any offence involving moral turpitude and sentenced in respect thereof to imprisonment for not less than two years;

(f) that proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant are pending before a criminal court in India;

(g) that a warrant or summons for the appearance, or a warrant for the arrest, of the applicant has been issued by a court under any law for the time being in force or that an order prohibiting the departure from India of the applicant has been made by any such court;

(h) that the applicant has been repatriated and has not reimbursed the expenditure incurred in connection with such repatriation;

(i) that in the opinion of the