SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(All) 263

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Shamim Ahmed, J.
Kashif Ahmad – Petitioner
Versus
Union Of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Of External Affairs New Delhi And Others – Respondents
Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. - 2067 of 2024
Decided On : 21-03-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Ajmal Khan, Javed Khan

IMPORTANT POINT
The issuance of a passport during the pendency of a criminal case is at the discretion of the court and depends on various factors such as the nature of the alleged offense and the stage of the trial.

Headnote:

Passport Renewal - Jurisdiction of Court - Passports Act 1967, Section 22, Notification No. GSR 570(E) dated 25.08.1993, Office Memorandum dated 10.10.2019 - The court found that the learned trial court had ignored the relevant notifications and the legislative background while rejecting the application for renewal of passport. The court held that the issuance of a passport during the pendency of a criminal case is at the discretion of the court and depends on various factors such as the nature of the alleged offense and the stage of the trial.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought a writ to quash the order rejecting the renewal of his passport, citing his need to attend his brother-in-law's marriage in Saudi Arabia and the political cases lodged against him.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the learned trial court had ignored the relevant notifications and the legislative background while rejecting the application for renewal of passport.

Issues: The main issue was the rejection of the petitioner's application for renewal of passport by the learned trial court.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the issuance of a passport during the pendency of a criminal case is at the discretion of the court and depends on various factors such as the nature of the alleged offense and the stage of the trial.

Final Decision: The impugned order was quashed, and the matter was remanded back to the learned trial court for a fresh decision in light of the relevant notifications and the judgment in the case of Maneka Gandhi (Supra). The petitioner was directed to file a fresh application for renewal of passport, which should be decided expeditiously.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Ajmal Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Surya Bhan Pandey, learned Sr. Advocate and Deputy Solicitor General of India assisted by Sri Varun Pandey, learned counsel for the Union of India as well as perused the record.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed seeking following main relief:-

    "I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the order dated 17.01.2024 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-V, Room No.29, Lucknow, by means of which application for renewal of passport of petitioner was rejected."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a Passport No. H8600780 was issued to the petitioner by the Passport Office, Lucknow for the period of 01.12.2009 to 30.11.2019, which has been expired. The petitioner has visited six times to Kingdom of Saudi Arab and lastly he visited in the Month of February, 2019. He further submits that petitioner's brother-in-law's marriage is schedule on 30.04.2024 in the Kingdom of Saudi Arab and petitioner is willing to attend the same.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that an application was filed by the petitioner before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-V, Room No.29, Lucknow for grant of permission for renewal of passport, which was rejected by means of order dated 17.01.2024 observing therein that this Court has no jurisdiction for granting the permission of renewal of passport. He further submits that the petitioner is a member of political party, therefore, in the month of December, 2019, five cases were lodged against the petitioner, which are related to protest against CAA/NRC. In any of the case, charge has not been fixed by the learned trial court till date.

5. In support of his argument, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the notification of Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi dated 25.08.1993, which is being quoted hereunder :-

    "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 External Affairs No. G.S.R. 298(E), dated the 14th April, 1976, the Central Government, being of the opinion that it is necessary in public interest to do so, hereby exempts citizens of India against whom proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by them are pending before a criminal court in India and who produce orders from the court concerned permitting them to depart from India, from the operation of the provisions of Clause (f) of sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the said Act, subject to the following conditions, namely:-

(a) the passport to be issued to every such citizen shall be issued -

(i) for the period specified in order of the court referred to above, if the court specified a period for which the passport has to be issued; or

(ii) if no period either for the issue of the passport for the travel abroad is specified in such order, the passport shall be issued for a period of one year;

(iii) if such order gives permission to travel abroad for a period less than one year, but does not specify the period of validity of the passport, the passport shall be issued for one year; or

(iv) if such order gives permission to travel abroad for a period exceeding one year, and does not specify the validity of the passport, then the passport shall be issued for the period of travel abroad specified in the order;

(b) any passport issued in terms of (a)(ii) and (a)(iii) above can be further renewed fr one year at a time, provided the applicant has not travelled abroad for the period sanctioned by the court; and provided further that, in the meantime, the order of the court is not cancelled or modified.

(c) any passport issued in terms of (a)(i) above can be further renewed only on the basis f a fresh court order specifying a further period of validity of the passport or specifying a period for

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top