Back
Jagtar Singh Gets Passport Renewal Relief: Surrender on Bail Not Permanent Bar, High Court Rules
In a significant ruling reinforcing the as part of , the has held that the mere surrender of a passport as a condition of bail cannot operate as a against its renewal. Justice Virinder Aggarwal, presiding over a single bench, allowed a petition by Jagtar Singh, who sought renewal of his passport to visit his family in Australia, and directed the trial court to return his expired passport for that purpose.
Case Background: From to Travel Denial
The case stems from an FIR registered in at under multiple sections of the , including cheating, forgery, and . Jagtar Singh was granted by the High Court in , with a condition that he surrender his passport. The passport subsequently expired. When Singh applied to the , seeking its renewal and permission to travel abroad, the application was rejected on the grounds that the passport had been surrendered pursuant to the bail order and that no urgency had been demonstrated.
Petitioner’s Plea: No Evasion, Only Family Visit
Represented by counsel , Singh argued that he was implicated in the FIR primarily based on a co-accused’s , without any linking him to the alleged irregularities. He emphasized that he did not seek any alteration of his , but only limited permission to renew his passport so that he could visit his son, daughter-in-law, son-in-law, daughter, and granddaughter residing in Australia. He contended that the trial court’s order declining his application was legally unsustainable.
State’s Opposition: Lack of Exceptional Circumstances
The State, through Deputy Advocate General , opposed the petition, submitting that Singh had voluntarily surrendered his passport under the and had not shown any compelling or warranting relaxation. The State maintained that the was well-reasoned and free from illegality.
Court’s Reasoning: Under Article 21 Prevails
Justice Aggarwal observed that the relief sought was confined to renewal of the passport, not any dilution of . The Court held that mere compliance with a judicial direction to surrender a passport cannot, by itself, create a permanent bar on its renewal, particularly when the accused does not seek to evade proceedings. The right to possess a passport and to travel abroad, the Court emphasized, is an integral part of guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, subject only to imposed by law or a competent court’s orders.
Key Observations
"Mere in compliance with a judicial direction cannot, by itself, operate as a against its renewal, particularly when the petitioner does not seek to evade the or dilute the conditions governing his bail."
"The right to possess a passport and to travel abroad forms part of the guaranteed under , subject to imposed by law and the orders of a competent Court."
Final Decision: Passport to Be Returned for Renewal, Then Deposited
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the criminal proceedings, the High Court directed the Trial Court to return the expired passport to Singh for the limited purpose of producing it before the and applying for renewal. Once the renewed passport is issued, Singh is required to forthwith deposit it with the Trial Court, where it will remain subject to the orders and conditions governing him during the pendency of the proceedings. The petition was allowed in these terms, with all pending miscellaneous applications disposed of as infructuous.
