The Allahabad High Court observed that under the Indian Passport Act 1967, a person seeking the issuance of a passport is not required to obtain prior permission from the competent court, even if such a person is facing criminal charges.
Brief Facts:
The present petition was filed by the petitioner whose application for issuance of a passport was rejected by the passport authority, citing the pendency of two criminal cases against him.
Contentions of the Applicant:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had applied for issuance of a passport on 20.01.2022 under Section 5 of the Indian Passport Act and on receipt of the said application, a report was called for from the Superintendent of Police, Sultanpur. It was submitted that two criminal cases are pending against the petitioner and further merely on account of the said cases, no decision has been taken by the passport authority under Section 5 of the Indian Passport Act and accordingly in the present writ petition a prayer has been made for a direction to respondent No. 4 to take a decision on the application of the petitioner for issuance of a passport.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent opposed the writ petition and submitted that respondent No. 4 is not obliged to take any decision and the petitioner should apply to the court of competent jurisdiction where the criminal cases are pending for obtaining a passport.
Observations of the court:
The court perused the submissions and noted that the manner of dealing with an application for issuance of a passport has been dealt with in Sections 5 & 6 of the Indian Passport Act and under the Indian Passport Act, the application for grant of the passport can be rejected on any of the conditions as prescribed under Sections 5 & 6 of the said Act. Further, the court stated that the scheme of the Act clearly demonstrates that the application for issuance of a passport has to be considered and decided by the passport authority as per Section 5(2) of the Act of 1967, and there is further provision of an appeal against order passed under Section 5(2) of the Act of 1967 is provided under Section 11 of the Act of 1967.
The court stated that in the present case, there is no dispute with regard to the fact that respondent No. 4 has not taken any decision on the application preferred by the petitioner as required under Section 5 of the Indian Passport Act and the competent authority under the Indian Passport Act is under a mandate to take a decision as per Sections 5. The court further stated that no prior permission from the competent court is required where criminal cases are pending for the issue of a passport, and no such provision has been envisaged in the said Act. The court added that if an applicant plans to go abroad, he would undoubtedly have to apply to the court of competent jurisdiction where the criminal cases are pending to seek such permission.
The decision of the Court:
The court allowed the petition and directed the respondent to consider and decide the application preferred by petitioner 2 in accordance with the law expeditiously.
Case Title: Umapati vs Union of India and Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr Justice Alok Mathur and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal
Case No.: WRIT - C No. - 5587 of 2024
Advocate for the Petitioner: Deepak Kumar
Advocate for the Respondent: A.S.G.I.
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
