Karnataka High Court
Sri Raghavendra Eshwar Naik vs Union Of India on 8 April, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:19509
WP No. 7064 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO. 7064 OF 2026 (GM-PASS)
BETWEEN:
SRI RAGHAVENDRA ESHWAR NAIK
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
S/O ESHWARNAIK
R/AT NO. 373/1, NEHRU NAGAR
MUNDGOD,
UTTARA KANNADA-581349
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. T S VENKATESH.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
Digitally signed MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS,
by CHAITHRA A
Location: HIGH NO.74B, SOUTH DELHI
COURT OF
KARNATAKA NEW DELHI-110001
2. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER,
REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE
8TH BLOCK, 80 FEET ROAD
KORAMANAGALA
BANGALORE-560095
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MUKUND PRASAD., ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:19509
WP No. 7064 of 2026
HC-KAR
QUASHING THE ENDORSEMENT WITH RESPECT TO FILE
NO.BN3074978693625, LETTER REF NO. OBJ/1053388166/26
DATED 21.01.2026 ANNEXURE-E ISSUED BY 2ND
RESPONDENT. B) CONSEQUENTLY ISSUE A WRIT OF
MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT, ORDER AND/OR DIRECTION
TO RE-ISSUE/RENEW THE PASSPORT NO.MO636960 OF THE
PETITIONER, SUBMITTED VIDE APPLICATION REF NO.25-
1004287369 DATED 22.04.2025 ANNEXURE B. C) GRANT
SUCH OTHER RELIEF OR RELIEFS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT
MAY DEEM FIT TO GRANT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE
CASEVT
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
ORAL ORDER
The captioned writ petition is filed seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the endorsement dated 21.01.2026 issued by respondent No.2-Passport Authority and for a consequential direction to renew/reissue the passport of the petitioner.
2. The petitioner had submitted an application seeking renewal of passport. Pursuant to the same, respondent No.2 issued the impugned endorsement calling -3- NC: 2026:KHC:19509 WP No. 7064 of 2026 HC-KAR upon the petitioner to furnish clarification regarding pendency of a criminal case.
3. In response, the petitioner submitted that in Crime No.4/2019 registered for offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471 and 420 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "IPC") a 'B' report has already been filed by the Investigating Officer and therefore there are no subsisting criminal proceedings. The petitioner accordingly sought issuance of passport.
4. It is, however, not in dispute that a protest petition has been filed by a third party/complainant and the same is pending consideration before the jurisdictional Magistrate.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that in view of Sections 5 and 6 of the Passport Act, 1967 (for short "Act"), refusal of passport is permissible only on limited grounds. Since a 'B' report has been filed and the learned Magistrate has neither taken -4- NC: 2026:KHC:19509 WP No. 7064 of 2026 HC-KAR cognizance nor issued process under Section 204 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973(for short "Cr.P.C."), the proceedings cannot be treated as "pending". Placing reliance on Notification dated 25.08.1993, it is contended that even if proceedings are pending, the applicant can seek permission from the competent Court and passport ought to be issued. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in Pradeep Kumar Kandoi v. Union of India1 to contend that filing of a negative final report would not amount to pendency of proceedings.
6. This Court has carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record.
7. Section 6(2)(f) of the Act mandates refusal of passport if proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant are pending before a criminal court.
1 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2897/2024 -5- NC: 2026:KHC:19509 WP No. 7064 of 2026 HC-KAR
8. In the present case, though a 'B' report has been filed, the matter has not attained finality. The complainant has filed a protest petition and the same is pending adjudication before the learned Magistrate. The Magistrate is yet to examine the protest petition and take a decision either to accept the 'B' report or to proceed further in accordance with law. Therefore, it cannot be said that the criminal proceedings have concluded or that the petitioner stands absolved of the allegations.
9. This Court in Kajal Naresh Kumar v. Union of India2 has categorically held that mere filing of a 'B' report would not dilute the rigour of Section 6(2)(f) of the Act and that the bar would continue until the applicant is acquitted, discharged or the proceedings are quashed.
10. In view of the binding precedent of this Court, the contention of the petitioner that no proceedings are pending cannot be accepted.
2 2022 SCC Online Kar 1952 -6- NC: 2026:KHC:19509 WP No. 7064 of 2026 HC-KAR
11. This Court is of the considered opinion that the Passport Authority is justified in declining issuance of a regular passport in view of the pendency of proceedings within the meaning of Section 6(2)(f) of the Act. However, such pendency cannot operate as an absolute bar in all circumstances.
12. In the peculiar facts of the present case, where a 'B' report is filed but a protest petition is pending consideration, the ends of justice would be met by directing issuance of a Short Validity Passport (SVP), subject to conditions.
13. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed in part.
(ii) The endorsement dated 21.01.2026 issued by respondent No.2 stands quashed to the limited extent indicated above.-7-
NC: 2026:KHC:19509 WP No. 7064 of 2026 HC-KAR
(iii) In the event the petitioner submits a fresh application seeking issuance of a Short Validity Passport (SVP), respondent No.2-Passport Authority shall consider the same and issue a Short Validity Passport, in accordance with law and applicable guidelines, subject to such reasonable conditions as may be imposed.
(iv) The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the application.
(v) It is made clear that issuance of the Short Validity Passport shall be subject to the outcome of the protest petition pending before the jurisdictional Magistrate, and any order that may be passed therein.
(vi) All other contentions are kept open.
Sd/-
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE ALB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 102