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)(Ker) 27672

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, J
MUNEER PK – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 44873 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.ATHUL M.V.,SHRI.GOVIND CHAND U.
For the Respondents: O.M.SHALINA,DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA,SRI. P.S. APPU,G.P.

Court permission for travel exempts passport impounding under Passports Act despite pending criminal case per G.S.R 570(E).

Headnote:The Passports Act, 1967, under Section 6(2)(f) allows refusal of passports if criminal proceedings are pending, and Section 10(3)(e) permits impounding on similar grounds. Petitioner, working abroad, had passport reissued but impounded due to pending criminal case (C.C. No.251/2023) despite non-disclosure. Court found impounding unsustainable post magistrate's permission order (Ext. P13). Issue: Whether pendency of criminal case justifies passport impounding despite court permission. Ratio: G.S.R 570(E) dated 25/08/1993 exempts issuance/impounding if court permits travel abroad subject to conditions like specified validity and undertakings. Writ petition allowed; Ext.P8 set aside; direction to release passport within two weeks.

Table of Content
1. passport impounded due to pending criminal case. (Para 2)
2. criminal case pendency invoked sections 6(2)(f), 10(3)(e). (Para 3)
3. g.s.r 570(e) exempts impounding with court permission. (Para 4)
4. impounding set aside; passport release directed. (Para 5)

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the holder of an Indian passport and is working in Qatar since 2016. The expiry of the passport was due on 14.12.2025 and the petitioner applied for reissue and the passport was reissued on 13.10.2025. The 2ndrespondent issued Ext. P6 show cause notice stating that the Police Verification Report indicates that the petitioner is an accused in C.C. No.251/2023 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-VIII, Ernakulam and the petitioner has suppressed the said fact and calling upon him to show cause why the passport should not be impounded. The petitioner submitted Ext. P7 reply stating that the pendency of criminal case was not mentioned since the case was under pre -trial stage. By Ext. P8, the 2ndrespondent impounded the passport underSection 10(3) (e) of thePassports Act, 1967on the ground that a criminal case is pending against the petitioner. This writ petition is preferred challenging Ext.P8. It is contended by the petitioner that the pendency of criminal case cannot be a reason for impounding the passport. 2. A statement on behalf of the 2ndrespondent has been placed on record by the learned DSGI wherein it is stated that since criminal case is pending against the petitioner,Section 6(2) (f) of thePassports Act, 1967applies and the passport was impounded underSection 10(3) (e) of the Act.

3. During the pendency of this writ petition, the petitioner has produced Ext. P13 order (along with I.A.No.1/2026) issued by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-VIII, Ernakulam in CMP No. 2 of 2026 in C.C. No.251/2023 permitting him to continue his employment abroad subject to conditions.

4. Section 6 of the Passports Act deals with refusal of passports, travel documents, etc and sub-section 2(f) thereof provides that subject to other provisions of the 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 the ground that proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant are pending before a Criminal Court in India. Section 10 of the Passports Act deals with variation, impounding and revocation of passports and travel documents and sub section (3) (e) thereof provides that the passport authority may impound or cause to be impounded or revoke a passport or travel document if proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the holder of the passport or travel document are pending before a criminal court in India.

However, the Government of India has, in exercise of powers under clause (a) of Section 22 of the Passports Act, 1967 issued G.S.R 570(E) dated 25/08/1993 exempting 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 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:--

"(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 for 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 period 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 ex

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