IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ****

CWP-6312-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision: 28.10.2025 Sukhminder Singh Mann …Petitioner Versus Union of India and another …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER Present : Mr. Sarbuland Singh Mann, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Ruchita Garg, Advocate for respondents-Union of India (through video conferencing).

***

HARSH BUNGER, J.

Prayer in the present writ petition field under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent No.2 -Regional Passport Officer, Amritsar, to renew the passport of the petitioner against file no. ASR079376237424 dated 20.03.2024 (Annexure P-1).

1.1 A further prayer has been made for setting aside order dated 03.01.2025 (Annexure P-9) passed by Assistant Passport Officer, R.P.O, Amritsar.

2. Briefly, the petitioner submitted an application dated

2025.10.30 10:3720.03.2024 (Annexure P-1) seeking renewal of his passport. Being a serving IPS Officer, petitioner gave prior intimation to the office of Director General of Police, Punjab vide letter dated 18.03.2024 (Annexure P-2). It appears that two criminal cases, i.e. FIR No.129 of 2018 and FIR No.192 of 2015, were pending against petitioner. On account of pendency of these cases, respondent No.2 raised an objection, and the Regional Passport Office, Amritsar, sought a report from the Commissioner of Police, Amritsar, regarding the status of the aforesaid FIRs and further advised that the petitioner may obtain permission from the concerned Court. Pursuant thereto, the DGP, Punjab, vide communication dated 27.05.2024 (Annexure P-4), directed the petitioner to secure permission from the trial Court for renewal of his passport. In compliance, the petitioner moved appropriate applications before the respective trial Courts, which, vide orders dated 21.10.2024 (Annexures P-5 and P-6), permitted renewal of the passport in accordance with the Rules, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall not leave India without obtaining prior permission of the Court.

2.1 Relying on the aforesaid orders, the petitioner submitted a representation (Annexure P-7) to the Regional Passport Office, Amritsar, enclosing copies of the trial Court’s orders and requesting renewal of his passport. However, respondent No. 2, vide impugned order dated 03.01.2025 (Annexure P-9), rejected the request for renewal on the ground that the orders passed by the learned Magistrate (Annexures P-5 and P-6) did not specifically grant permission to “travel abroad”, as required under GSR 570(E) dated 25.08.1993, issued by the Ministry of External Affairs under Section 22 of the Passports Act, 1967.

2025.10.30 10:37

3. In the aforementioned circumstances, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition before this Court, for the relief/s, as noticed hereinabove.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the impugned order is arbitrary, contrary to law and violative of the petitioner’s fundamental right to travel abroad. It is submitted that the learned trial Court vide orders dated 21.10.2024 (Annexures P-5 and P-6) has already granted permission to the petitioner for renewal of his passport, however the respondent authorities have wrongly issued letter dated 03.01.2025 (Annexure P-9) on the ground that petitioner has not been granted permission to travel abroad. It is submitted that, it is only after getting the renewed passport, the petitioner can approach the trial Court and seek permission to go abroad or depart from India, by giving the details of his passport, visa, travel itinerary etc.

5. Learned counsel for respondents while opposing the petition submitted that, under Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act, 1967 (in short “the 1967 Act”), the passport authority is empowered to refuse issuance of a passport or travel document to any person against whom criminal proceedings are pending before a court in India. Further, reference is made to Notification GS