Right to hold a passport and travel is a fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Constitution, and cannot be denied solely based on pending criminal charges without due evaluation of specific circumstances.

Judgment :

Aditya Kumar Mohapatra, J.

1. The present batch of applications have been filed by a common Accused-Petitioner in all these cases under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., 2023, which corresponds to Section 482 of Cr.P.C., with a prayer to quash/set aside the impugned order dated 06.03.2025, at Annexure-3 to CRLMC No.2583 of 2025, passed by the learned J.M.F.C. (Cog. Taking), Bhadrak in respect of G.R. Case No.708 of 2017 and similar impugned orders passed by the learned J.M.F.C. which are subject matter of challenge in the above noted CRLMC applications whereby the prayer of the Petitioner before learned Magistrate for grant of NOC in favour of the Petitioner for issuance of a passport to travel abroad has been rejected.

2. Since all the above noted CRLMC applications have been filed by a common accused in different G.R. cases pertaining to a common incident that had taken place in the year 2017, the nature of the relief sought for in all the aforesaid applications is similar and the issue that is to be decided by this Court in all the above noted applications is identical in nature, all the above noted CRLMC applications are taken up for hearing together and the same are being disposed of by the following order.

3. Heard Ms. Deepali Mahapatra, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. U.R. Jena, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-Opposite Party; Mr P.K. Parhi, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India for the Union of India. Perused application as well as the documents filed along with CRLMC applications and the impugned rejection orders.

4. Since all the CRLMC applications involve an identical factual background and the nature of relief sought for is similar, this Court takes up for consideration the facts involved in CRLMC No.2583 of 2025 as the lead matter in the present batch of CRLMC applications.

5. The Petitioner, who belongs to the Muslim community, is a permanent resident of Bhadrak Town and running his business there. In the year 2017, a communal riot erupted in Bhadrak Town, as a result of which extensive damage was caused to the properties belonging to the persons of both the communities. Later, several F.I.Rs were registered pertaining to the self-same incident. In the present case, an F.I.R. was lodged before the Purunabazar P.S. of Bhadrak District which was registered as P.S. Case No.60 of 2017 for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 147/148/294/454/427/395/436/153A/506/149 of I.P.C. The F.I.R. was lodged initially against four named accused persons and some other unknown accused persons and the name of the Petitioner does not find place in the F.I.R. The F.I.R. which was lodged by one Prasanta Kumar Sahu on 10.04.2017, inter alia, alleges that on the very same day at about 7.05 P.M. in the evening, while he was preparing ‘Chhatua’ in his factory, accused persons armed with weapons entered into the factory of the Informant. The Informant was given a life threat and asked to leave the place instantly. Thereafter, the Informant ran away from his factory. Consequently, the accused persons ransacked the factory premises and stole away food articles which were stored in his factory. Eventually, the factory premises was set on fire, as a result of which, the Inf

6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, contended that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and that he has no involv