The denial of passport renewal based solely on pending cases without affording a fair hearing violates principles of natural justice and the right to livelihood under Article 21.

ORDER :

1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:

“By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents i.e. Embassy of India, Kuwait may kindly be directed to release the passport of the petitioner, so that the petitioner can apply for NOC from the concerned criminal court.

By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondent authorities i.e. Regional Passport Officer, Jaipur or the Embassy of India, Kuwait may kindly be directed to renew the passport of the petitioner.

Any other order which the Hon'ble Court deems fit, proper and just in the interest of justice.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment dated 07.12.2021, passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of Hardik Shah Vs. Union of India & Ors. in Writ Petition No. 5692 of 2020 (Indore).

3. Learned counsel for the respondent is in agreement with the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

4. The order dated 07.12.2021 is reproduced hereinbelow:-

"1. The petitioner, a travel blogger and consultant has visited this Court for the second time against the action of Regional Passport Authority, Bhopal in not issuing a regular passport for a period of ten years and on the contrary impounding his passport in utter violation of principles of natural justice.

2. Draped in brevity, the case of the petitioner is that being a travel blogger by profession, the petitioner is required to travel around the globe. The passport was initially issued to the petitioner on 05.09.1997. The said passport was renewed for a period of ten years on 02.06.2014 and a new passport valid till 01.06.2024 was issued.

3. There was a matrimonial discord of petitioner with his wife who allegedly left matrimonial house оп 12.09.2016. The petitioner's wife took away the old passport of the petitioner with her. Petitioner filed the police complain regarding said action of his wife on 10.10.2016. Petitioner's wife also filed an F.I.R. in Crime No.729/2016 against the petitioner and his family members on 03.11.2016 alleging demand of dowry etc. The petitioner filed a petition for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act which is still sub judice. The petitioner got bail in the said crime number on 26.04.2017. No condition was imposed in the bail order restricting the petitioner to travel abroad.

4. In turn, on 31.07.2017, the petitioner made an application for re-issuance of passport because his earlier passport was taken away by his wife. The petitioner also filed a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 bearing. No.8168/2019 before Allahabad High Court. On 08.03.2019, the High Court protected the petitioner, referred the matter to mediation and directed that no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner.

5. Shri Prateek Maheshwari, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner's wife sent an email to the Passport Authority alleging that petitioner was not attending criminal proceedings, and therefore, action may be taken under Section 10 of the Passport Act, 1967. Certain documents were sent to the Passport Authority through email by the wife of the petitioner. The Passport Authority directed the wife to remain present for verification of documents annexed with the complain. She did not turn up and all her complain sent through email were entertained and treated as gospel truth.

6. A show-casue notice under Section 10(3)(h) of the said Act was issued to petitioner on 07.06.2019 as to why his passport should not be impounded. Pausing here for a moment, Shri Maheshwari urged that notice was confined for impounding of passport and not for its revocation. The petitioner while submitting a preliminary reply on 27.06.2019 requested the authority to supply copy of complain and supporting documents. When petitioner's said request went in vain, he filed W.P. No.18354/2019 before this Court