Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BISWANATH RATH
Madhusmita Samant – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's request for passport renewal. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding criminal cases obstructing renewal. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's reasoning on passport renewal eligibility. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. precedents supporting renewal despite criminal charges. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. court action regarding unlawful passport obstruction. (Para 11) |
| 6. observations on division bench judgment issues. (Para 12) |
| 7. writ petition's success and order. (Para 13) |
Judgment :
1. This Writ Petition is at the instance of the Petitioner on the following prayer :-
2. Factual background appears to be the Petitioner is already in grant of Passport No.H3734383. The period of Passport remains to be from 24.3.2009 to 23.3.2019. Finding the Passport going to expire and as required under law, the Petitioner, a woman in her sincere attempt in applying for renewal of Passport in due time and appears to be still struggling in the matter of renewal of her Passport.
“1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. Mr.Pal, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that for there is further scope for satisfaction of the Petitioner’s case, he does not want to proceed with the Writ Petition presently and undertakes t
Pending criminal cases do not obstruct passport renewal if the petitioner is on bail, emphasizing the need for reasoning in judicial decisions.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the pendency of criminal cases should not automatically lead to the refusal of passport renewal, as the provisions of the Passports Act, 19....
Pendency of criminal proceedings does not automatically bar passport renewal; restrictions on rights must be just and legal, emphasizing individual liberty under Article 21.
The main legal point established is that the pendency of criminal cases should not lead to denial of passport facilities, as per the Passports Act, 1967 and Rule 12 of Passport Rules, 1980, and suppo....
The notification dated 25.08.1993, issued by the Central Government, exempts certain applicants from the operation of Section 6 (2) (f) of the Passports Act, which prohibits renewal of passports for ....
The pendency of a criminal case does not justify the refusal of passport services, as individuals retain their right to travel freely, protected under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.
The right to hold a passport and travel abroad is a fundamental liberty, and restrictions based solely on pending criminal proceedings must be just, fair, and reasonable.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
