Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The 2nd respondent/Regional Passport Officer had issued rejection letter dated 31.01.2024 refusing the passport services to the petitioner under Section 5(2)(C) of the passport Act, 1967 read with section 6(2)(f) as there is a criminal case pending against the petitioner vide Cr.No.23 of 2023 registered under section 447, 427 IPC vide C.C.No.154 of 2023 pending on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate at Parigi, Ranga Reddy District and since the same is coming up for trail(summons) on 09.01.2024. Challenging the said rejection letter dated 31.01.2024, the petitioner approached the Court by way of filing the present Writ petition. Hence, the petition.

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner contends that the petitioner submitted his detailed explanation to the 2nd respondent to the notice dated 03.01.2024 issued to the petitioner and inspite of receipt of the said representation the 2nd respondent authority took a decision to refuse passport facility to SN, J the petitioner and issued impugned rejection notice, dated 31.01.2024.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that, respondents cannot refuse the issuance of passport facilities to the petitioner on the ground of the pendency of the aforesaid criminal case against the petitioner and the said action of the respondents is contrary to the procedure laid down under the Passports Act, 1967.

8. It is also relevant to note that the Apex Court in Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu (supra) had an occasion to examine the provisions of the Passports Act, 1967, pendency of criminal cases and held that refusal of a passport can be only in case where an applicant is convicted during the period of five (05) years immediately preceding the date of application for an offence involving moral turpitude and sentence for imprisonment for not less than two years. Section 6.2(f) relates to a situation where the applicant is facing trial in a criminal Court. The petitioner therein was convicted in a case for the offences under Sections 420 IPC and also Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, against which, an appeal was filed and the same was dismissed. The sentence was reduced to a period of one (01) year. The petitioner therein had approached the Apex Court by way of filing an appeal and the same is pending. Therefore, considering the said facts, the Apex Court held that Passport Authority cannot refuse renewal of the passport on the ground of pendency of the criminal appeal. Thus, the Apex Court directed the Passport Authority to issue the SN, J passport of the applicant without raising the objection relating to the pendency of the aforesaid criminal appeal in S.C.

14. In view of the above, this Court opines that mere pendency of criminal case is not a ground to refuse passport SN, J facilities to the petitioner. Further, the petitioner herein is ready to co-operate with the trial Court in concluding trial. Therefore, the petitioner herein sought issuance of necessary directions to respondents for consideration of the petitioner's detailed explanation for issuance of passport facilities to the petitioner for the purpose of continuing petitioner's higher studies at aboard. Thus, on the ground of pendency of the above criminal case, passport cannot be denied to the petitioner.