Delhi High Court - Orders
Jai Bhagwan Goyal vs State, Nct Of Delhi on 19 November, 2025
Author: Sanjeev Narula
Bench: Sanjeev Narula
$~73
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.REV.P. 110/2021
JAI BHAGWAN GOYAL .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Manish Gupta, Mr. Manoj
Kumar, Mr.Amit thakur, Mr. Mohan
Sharma, Advocates.
versus
STATE, NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Hemant Mehla, APP for State
along with SI Sawan Kumar, PS
Gokalpuri, Delhi.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
ORDER
% 19.11.2025 CRL.M.A. 34323/2025 (Exemption)
1. Exemption is granted, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The Applicant shall file legible and clearer copies of exempted documents, compliant with practice rules, before the next date of hearing.
3. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. CRL.M.A. 34322/2025 (Seeking travel permission for reissuance of passport as objected by Regional Passport Office)
4. The Applicant is a convict in FIR No. 267/2010 dated 08th August, 2010, registered at P.S. Gokul Puri, Delhi under Sections 147, 148, 332, 427 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 18601. The conviction judgment was 1 "IPC"
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/11/2025 at 22:20:39 passed on 08th October, 2020, which was upheld by the Sessions Court on 23rd February, 2021. The said conviction is presently under challenge in the instant revision petition. By order dated 29th April, 2021, the sentence imposed upon the Applicant was suspended, subject to certain conditions, which include that he shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.
5. This condition continues to remain in force. However, the Applicant is constrained to file this petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20232 (corresponding to Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19733) as his request for renewal of passport has been declined by the Regional Passport Office, Delhi, vide communication dated 08th October, 2025, on the ground that a criminal case is pending and that the Applicant has failed to submit a prior travel permission from the Court.
6. It is also be noted that the ACJM Court, vide order dated 17th October, 2025, has already granted the Applicant an NOC for renewal of his passport, making the following observations:
"This Court finds that the applicant/convict was granted bail pending his revision petition by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and he submitted his bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of this Court. This Court would thus have no objection if the passport of the applicant/ convict Jai Bhagwan Goyal is renewed for 10 years as per rules. This Order shall not be construed as an direction to the RPO/ Concerned Authority, to renew or not to renew the passport of the applicant/ convict. However, the applicant/ convict shall bear in mind the Order dated 29.04.2021 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi not to leave the country without its permission."
7. Be that as it may, the issue of furnishing of Court NOC/travel 2 "BNSS"
3"CrPC"
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/11/2025 at 22:20:39 permission as a precondition for renewal of a passport has been dealt in detail in Sunil Goel v. Union of India & Ors.4 wherein it has been clarified that the Passports Act, 1967 is a self-contained code and does not mandate the securing of prior Court permission to travel abroad as a precondition for renewal of passport. Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act merely empowers the Passport Authority to refuse the issuance/renewal of a passport where criminal proceedings are pending, but does not envisage imposing a requirement of a Court-granted travel permission for renewal. The insistence on such directions, as contemplated in the GSR 570(E) Notification dated 25th August, 1993, issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, finds no support in the parent legislation. The delegated legislation cannot travel beyond the contours of the Act.5
8. The bail/suspension of sentence granted to the Applicant is governed by its own terms, and the Applicant shall necessarily seek prior leave of the Court in case he intends to travel abroad. However, the renewal of a passport, which also functions as a primary identification document, cannot be denied solely on the basis that the Petitioner has not been granted travel permission. The insistence of the Passport Authority on such permission is, therefore, contrary to the statutory scheme under the Passports Act and is impermissible in law.
9. Accordingly, the Regional Passport Office is directed to process the Applicant's application for renewal of passport expeditiously, in accordance with the Passports Act, and the rules framed thereunder, without insisting upon a prior permission to travel abroad from this Court. The existing 4 W.P. (CRL) 1146/2025.
5See Kaushalya Devi v. State of NCT of Delhi CRL.M.C. 3166/2025; See also: Akash & Anr. v. State This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/11/2025 at 22:20:39 condition that the Applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the competent Court shall continue to operate and any request for foreign travel shall be considered on its own merits.
10. Accordingly, the present application is disposed of.
SANJEEV NARULA, J NOVEMBER 19, 2025/MK CRL. A. 147/2020.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/11/2025 at 22:20:39