Karnataka High Court
Rukhsana Begum vs Government Of India on 17 March, 2026
Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2498
WP No. 201222 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO. 201222 OF 2026 (GM-PASS)
BETWEEN:
1. RUKHSANA BEGUM W/O MOHAMMED SHAFI,
AGE: 80 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE HOLD.
2. SUHAIL MOHAMMED SHAFI SINDAGIKAR
S/O MOHAMMED SHAFI ALLABAKSH SINDGIKAR,
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: ENGINEER.
3. SALMAN MOHAMMED SHAFI SINDAGIKAR,
S/O MOHAMMED SHAFI ALLABAKSH SINDGIKAR,
AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE WORK,
ALL ARE R/O H.NO. LIG-103 BAGALKOT ROAD,
Digitally signed JALNAGAR HUDCO COLONY VIJAYAPURA-586109
by SACHIN
Location: HIGH ...PETITIONERS
COURT OF (BY SRI MALIK PASHA M., ADVOCATE)
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
MINISTRY OF EXETERNAL AFFAIRS,
REP. BY PASSPORT OFFICER,
REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE,
8TH BLOCK 80 FEET ROAD KORAMANGLA
BENGALURU-560095.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2498
WP No. 201222 of 2026
HC-KAR
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH,
THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VIJAYAPURA,
WOMEN POLICE STATION,
REP.BY STATE ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI-585107.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUDHIRSINGH R. VIJAPUR, DSGI FOR R1;
SRI SHESHADRI JAISHANKAR M., AGA FOR R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, A)
ISSUE THE WRIT IN NATURE OF MANDAMUS AND THEREBY
DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO REISSUE THE PASSPORT
IN FAVOU OF PETITIONER BY CONSIDERING THE ONLINE
APPLICATION DATED 28-08-2024, VIDE ANNEXURE-A, A-1 AND
A-2. B) ANY OTHER DIRECTIONS MAY BE ISSUED IN THE
FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioners are before this Court in this writ petition filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.1 to re-issue passport in favour of the petitioners by -3- NC: 2026:KHC-K:2498 WP No. 201222 of 2026 HC-KAR considering the online application filed by them on 28.08.2024 vide Annexures-A, A1 and A2.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. The petitioners who were earlier holding a Indian Passport appears to have filed an online application on 28.08.2024 vide Annexures-A, A1 and A2 seeking renewal of their passport which was about to expire. Considering the said application, communication at Annexures-B, B1 and B2 dated 05.11.2024 was issued by the Regional Passport Office, Bengaluru, calling upon the petitioners to furnish proof of clearance of a criminal case which was registered against them. The grievance of the petitioners is that, merely for the reason that, a criminal case is registered against them for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506 read with Section 149 of IPC, read with Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, the Passport Authority was not justified in keeping their application pending.
4. Sri. Sudheersingh R. Vijapur, learned DSGI appearing for respondent No.1 submits that, the petitioners -4- NC: 2026:KHC-K:2498 WP No. 201222 of 2026 HC-KAR can file necessary application before the Court of Magistrate seeking permission to travel abroad and since a criminal case is pending against them, the Passport Authority is justified in not passing any orders on the application filed seeking renewal of the passport in view of Section 6 of the Passport Act, 1967.
5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satwant Singh Sawhney Vs. D. Ramarathnam and others reported in AIR 1967 SC 1836 has held that, under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, no person can be deprived of his right to travel abroad, except according to the procedure established by law and right to travel cannot be curtailed on the ground that a criminal case is pending against him by refusing to renew his passport. The co- ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Mr. Krishna Chiranjeevi Rao Palukuri Venkata Vs. The Union of India, i.e. W.P.No.9141/2020 disposed of on 01.10.2020, in paragraph Nos.13 and 15 after placing reliance on the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satwant Singh Sawhney (supra) has held as follows: -5-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2498 WP No. 201222 of 2026 HC-KAR "13. In the instant case, petitioner is seeking for renewal for his passport, therefore, said request cannot be rejected by taking shelter under Section 6(2)(f) of the Act and Notification bearing No.G.S.R 570 (E) dated 25.08.1993 issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India.
15. The Apex Court in the case of Satwant Singh Sawhney supra, has held that under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, no person can be deprived of his right to travel except according to procedure established by law. Hence, petitioner's right to travel cannot be curtailed on the pretext that a criminal case is pending against him by refusing to renew his passport."
6. In view of the aforesaid, the Passport Authority is not justified in keeping the application of the petitioners filed at Annexures-A, A1 and A2 dated 28.08.2024 pending. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that, necessary direction has to be issued to the Regional Passport Officer, Bengaluru at Koramangala, who has issued Annexures-B, B1 and B2, to consider the online application of the petitioners at Annexures-A, A1 and A2 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a timeframe. -6-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2498 WP No. 201222 of 2026 HC-KAR
7. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER The writ petition is partly allowed, directing the Regional Passport Officer, Koramangala, Bengaluru-560095 to consider the online application of the petitioners dated 28.08.2024 at Annexures-A, A1 and A2 and pass appropriate orders on the same in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, but not later than a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Sd/-
(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE SVH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20 CT:PK