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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 11277

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Hemant M. Prachchhak, J
Shruti Rajiv Kapadia – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
C/SCA/4125/2026 | R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4125 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Laukik Pant
For the Respondents: Pradip D. Bhate

Passport authorities do not have the authority to decide whether an accused has a right to travel abroad; this power is vested in the Trial Court. Consequently, passports should be renewed for the standard 10-year period as per the Act and Rules.

Headnote:(A) Passports Act - Issuance of Passport - Pendency of Criminal Proceedings - Interpretation of GSR Notification 570(E) - Passport authorities lack the jurisdiction to determine the right of an accused to travel abroad; such authority rests solely with the Trial Court. (Para 9)

(B) Passport Renewal - Validity Period - Where a court permits renewal or proceedings are stayed, the passport should be renewed for the standard period of 10 years as per the Act and Rules, rather than being restricted to one year under the notification, provided the Trial Court's permission is obtained for actual travel. (Para 9, 10)

Issues: Whether the passport of a petitioner facing criminal proceedings, where proceedings are stayed by the High Court, can be renewed for a period of 10 years.

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for direction to issue fresh passport to the petitioner for a period of 10 years.

2. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the Petitioner had filed Special Criminal Application (Quashing) No. 12518 of 2023 dated 25.08.2023 before this Court seeking quashing of Criminal Case No. 18650 of 2022 arising from FIR C.R. No. 11191028220849 dated 10.06.2022 registered at Vejalpur Police Station, Ahmedabad for offences under Sections 498A , 323, and 114 of the IPC. He submits that a charge sheet has been filed and the matter is pending before the Learned Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Ahmedabad. The Petitioner, has been arraigned as Accused No. 5 in the said FIR. He submits that this Court, vide order dated 10.10.2023, granted ad-interim relief staying further proceedings of the said criminal case, which has been continued till date by order dated 18.09.2024.

2.1 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Petitioner applied for issuance of a passport on 26.01.2026 (File No. AH2066885155426) and disclosed the pendency of the criminal case along with the stay order and also expressed willingness to furnish an undertaking under GSR 570(E) dated 25.08.1993. However, Respondent No. 2, vide letter dated 25.02.2026 bearing Ref. No. OBJ/1052808055/26, raised an objection requiring submission of a court order permitting issuance/reissue of passport along with a duly filled GSR 570(E) undertaking.

3. Mr. Pradip D. Bhate, learned advocate for the respondent submits that the passport application of the petitioner is to be processed in accordance with the GSR Notification 570(E) dated 25.08.1993. He submits that the citizens who are facing criminal proceedings have to produce orders from the Court concerned permitting them to depart from India.

4. Heard learned advocates for the parties, perused the documents on record and considered the submissions.

5. At the outset, it is not in dispute that the FIR being C.R. No. 11191028220849 dated 10.06.2022 registered at Vejalpur Police Station, Ahmedabad for offences under Sections 498A , 323, and 114 of the IPC.. Further, the investigation is over and the charge sheet has been filed. It is also noted herein that this Court, vide order dated 10.10.2023, granted ad-interim relief staying further proceedings of the criminal case, which has been continued till date by order dated 18.09.2024.

6. At this stage, it is appropriate to refer the GSR Notification 570(E) dated 25.08.1993 reads as under:-

“G.S.R 570 (E)-In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of the 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 offences 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 specifies a period for which the passport has to be issued; or

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

(iii) if such order gives permission to travel abroad for a period less than one year, but does not specify the periodvalidity 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 specif

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