IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT JABALPUR

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE B. P. SHARMA

th

ON THE 8 OF JANUARY, 2026

WRIT PETITION No. 19270 of 2025

JINENDRA JAIN

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Akash Singhai - Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Amit Bhurrak - PL for respondent/State.

ORDER for offence under Sections 447, 448 of IPC. Since the passport of petitioner was going to expire, therefore he filed an application for renewal of his passport. However, the Regional Passport Office, Bhopal by order dated 07/08/2024 has refused to renew the passport in absence of NOC/ permission from the Court regarding issuance of passport facilities.

This petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed

seeking following relief(s):-

I. It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that Your Lordships may graciously be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to set-aside impugned order dt.17.5.2025 passed in RCT no. 2090/2017 (Annexure- P/1) passed by the Learned Trial Court, in

the interest of justice.

II. It is further most humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondents no.4 to renew the Passport of petitioner in accordance with law without influencing the impugned orderdt.17.5.2025 passed by Learned Trial Court contained in

Annexure-P/1, in the interest of justice.

III. Any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court- deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case,

may also kindly be passed, in the interest of justice.

2. It is submitted by counsel for petitioner that petitioner is facing trial

3. By referring to the notification issued by Ministry of External Affairs dated 25/08/1993, it is submitted by counsel for petitioner that permission of the Court would be required only when a person wants to depart from India and not for renewal of passport. It is submitted that petitioner would certainly seek permission from the concerning Court incase, if he decides to travel abroad.

4 . Per contra, petition is vehemently opposed by counsel for the respondents.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

6. The Ministry of External Affairs has issued the notification dated

25/08/1993 which reads as under:-

“MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS NOTIFICATION New Delhi, the 25" August, 1993 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 14" 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 A 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 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 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 issue in terms of (a)(ii) and(a)(iii) above can be further renewed for one year at a time, provide