The refusal to renew a passport based on pending criminal proceedings is upheld, confirming that the same legal grounds for issuance apply to renewals.

JUDGMENT :

G. R. SWAMINATHAN, J.

The unsuccessful writ petitioner is the appellant before us. The appellant is an industrialist. His passport is valid upto 23.11.2025. He sought its renewal. Since an adverse police verification report was received by the passport authority, the renewal application was not processed. In these circumstances, the appellant filed WP(MD) No. 16123 of 2025 for directing the Regional Passport Officer, Madurai to renew his passport. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition with liberty to the appellant to move a suitable application before the trial court. Assailing the order dated 17.06.2025 dismissing the writ petition, this writ appeal has been filed.

2.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant pointed out that the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the decision reported in 2022 SCC OnLine Bom 1992 ( Abbas Hatimbhai Kagalwala v. State of Maharashtra ) had held that pendency of criminal proceedings before the trial court cannot be an impediment for renewal of one's passport. He called upon us to follow the said decision and allow this writ appeal.

3.Per contra, the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India submitted that the approach adopted by the learned Single Judge is in consonance with the legal position and that interference with the said order is not warranted.

4.We carefully considered the rival contentions and went through the materials on record. The writ petitioner is admittedly an accused in S.C No.128 of 2024 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Nagercoil for the offences under Sections 79 of the Juvenile Justice Act and Sections 370(1), 370(5), 370(a)(1) of IPC. That is why, in view of Section 6 (2)(f) of the Passports Act , 1967, the writ petitioner's application for renewal was not processed. The provision reads as follows :

“6.Refusal of passports, travel documents, etc.—

....

(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) .....

(b) ....

(c) ...

(d) ...

(e)...

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

The imperative nature of the provision is evident from the employment of the expression “shall”. The passport authority is obliged to refuse to issue passport if the applicant is facing proceedings in a criminal court. This provision has been interpreted by the courts to mean that the proceedings must be actually pending before the trial court. In other words, mere registration of an FIR would not operate as an impediment for issuance of passport. Since such a blanket prohibition would cause injustice and irreparable hardship in particular cases, the Government of India had issued Notification Dated 25.08.1993 enabling issuance of passport even if the criminal cases are pending before the trial court, if the applicant could produce order from the court concerned permitting them to depart from India. The notification is as follows :

“MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS NOTIFICATION New Delhi, the 25^th August, 1993 G.S.R.570(E)- In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of Section 22 of the Passports Act , 1967 (15 of 1967) and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Exter