Gujarat High Court
Nakib Ajazbhai Memon vs Union Of India on 13 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14931/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14931 of 2025
==========================================================
NAKIB AJAZBHAI MEMON
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.JAY S SHAH(7244) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR PRADIP D BHATE(1523) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 13/11/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard the learned counsels for the parties.
2. It is submitted that FIR No.I/151 of 2018 came to be
registered at Varacha Police Station, Surat City, Surat for the
offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120B and 114 of
Indian Penal Code against the petitioner on 02.05.2018. That the
said FIR is culminated into Criminal Case No.11004 of 2019
which is pending adjudication before the Court of learned Addl.
Sessions Judge, Surat. The petitioner is released on bail pending
trial. Since the petitioner was desirous of travelling abroad, he
moved an application being Criminal Misc. Application No.6036
of 2025 in the Court of learned 14 th Additional Sessions Judge,
Surat praying for release of his passport for renewal which has
expired. By order dated 12.08.2025, the said application came to
be allowed and the learned Trial Court has ordered release of
original passport deposited with the learned Trial Court for
renewal of the same. It was further directed that after the
renewal, the renewed passport as well as old passport shall be
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14931/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/11/2025
undefined
deposited with the learned Trial Court. Learned counsel submits
that pursuant to said order, the petitioner has made application
for re-issuance of passport on 09.11.2025. Learned counsel
submits that since the criminal case is pending against the
petitioner, the respondent authority had earlier renewed the
passport of the petitioner only for one year i.e. from 23.02.2024
to 22.02.2025. Learned counsel submits that in view of the
Government Notification dated 25.08.1993 and various decisions
of this Court, the petitioner is entitled to renew his passport for a
period of 10 years. He submits that in view of above facts, the
petitioner's passport may be directed to be renewed for a period
of ten years.
3. Mr. Pradip D. Bhate, the learned counsel appearing for the
respondent Passport Authority submits that the case of the
petitioner will be governed by the notification/circular dated
25.08.1993 and the application would be decided accordingly.
4. Considered the submissions made on behalf of the learned
counsels for the parties.
5. In this behalf, it is pertinent to take note of the
notification/circular dated 25.8.1993 issued by the Ministry of
External Affairs, providing that in the interest of public at large,
the citizens, be exempted, against whom the proceedings in
respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by them are
pending before the Criminal Court. The relevant extracts of the
notification dated 25.8.1993, read as under:
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14931/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/11/2025
undefined
"In exercise of the process conferred by clause (a) of Section 22 of
the Passport Act, 1967 (15 of 1967) and in supersession of the Notification
of the Government of India in the Ministry of External Affairs No. G.S.R 298
(E) dated the 14th April, 1976, the Central Government, being of the opinion
that it is necessary in public interest to do so, hereby exempts citizens of
India against whom proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have
been committed by them are pending before a criminal court in India and
who produce orders from the court concerned permitting them to depart
from India, from the operation of the provisions of Clause (f) of sub-section
(2) of Section 6 of the said Act, subject to the following conditions, namely:-
(a) the passport to be issued to every such citizen shall be issued -
(i) for the period specified in order of the court referred to
above, if the court specifies a period for which the passport has to
be issued; or
(ii) if no period either for the issue of the passport or for the travel
abroad is specified in such order, the passport shall be issued for a
period of one year;
(iii) if such order gives permission to travel abroad for a period less than
one year, but does not specify the period validity of the passport,
the passport shall be issued for one year; or
(iv) if such order gives permission to travel abroad for a period
exceeding one year, and does not specify the validity of the
passport, then the passport shall be issued for the period of travel
abroad specified in the order.
(b) any passport issued in terms of (a)(ii) and (a) (iii) above can be
further renewal for one year at a time, provided the applicant has not
travelled abroad for the period sanctioned by the court; and provided
further that in the meantime the order of the court is not cancelled or
modified;
(c) any passport issued in terms of (a) (i) above can be further renewed
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14931/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/11/2025
undefined
only on the basis of a fresh court order specifying a further period of
validity of the passport or specifying a period of travel abroad;
(d) the said citizen shall give an undertaking in writing to the passport
issuing authority that he shall, if required by the court concerned, appear
before it at any time during the continuance to force of the passport so
issued."
6. Clause (ii) thereof states that if there is no period specified
in the order passed by the Learned Trial Court for the issuance
of passport, the passport shall be issued for a period of one year.
The said Notification also specifies in Clause (i) that if the Ld.
concerned court specifies the period for which the passport has
to be issued, then the passport shall be issued for such a
specified period.
7. The Division Bench of the High Court of Mumbai in the
case of Narendra K. Ambwani v. Union of India & Ors. being
Writ Petition No. 361 of 2014, vide the order dated 13 th March,
2014 has held that:
"10. In the circumstances, we propose to issue guidelines to be followed
by the Respondents on receipt of the applications for renewal of the
passports, in all cases, where the Magistrate's court has directed that
the passports may be renewed as per the "Rules".
11. Accordingly, we issue the following directions:
(a) In all cases where the Magistrate's court directs renewal of the
passports under the Rules, the Passport Rules, 1980 shall apply
and passports other than for a child aged more than 15 years
shall be renewed for a period of ten years or twenty years as the
case may be from the date of its issue. All qualifying applicants
are entitled to have passport renewed for atleast ten years. The
Regional Passport Office shall renew the passports of such
qualifying applicants atleast for ten years.
(b) In case where the passports are valid and the applicants hold
valid visas on existing passport, the Regional Passport Officer
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14931/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/11/2025
undefined
shall issue the additional booklet to the same passport provided
the applicant had obtained permission to travel abroad.
(c) If the learned Magistrate passes an order making the reference
to the said Notification No. G.S.R. 570(E) dated 26 th August,
1993, the passport shall be renewed only for such period that
the Magistrate may specify in the order or as otherwise specified
in the said Notification where the passport of the applicant is
valid for less than one year, the additional booklet may be
issued subject to the orders to be obtained in this behalf only of
the Magistrate concerned.
12. For avoidance of doubt, we clarify that the guidelines set out herein
will be applicable only in the cases where the learned Magistrate ordered
renewal of the passports as per Passport Rules, 1980 and to no other. In
other cases, where the learned Magistrate had granted permission to the
accused persons to depart from India, the provisions of Section 6(2)(f) of
the Passports Act, 1967 and the Notification(s) issued thereunder from
time to time by the Ministry of External Affairs or such other competent
authority so empowered, will continue to apply and directions permitting
the accused persons to depart from India and/or the orders permitting
renewal of the passports of such accused persons shall continue
Notification(s)."
8. Though the said decision is not binding on this Court, it
certainly has a persuasive value. In the considered opinion of
this Court, the ratio of said judgment squarely applies in facts
and circumstances of the present case. The Central Government
has issued a Notification by exercising powers vested in it under
Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act, 1967 being GSR Notification
570(E) dated 25th August, 1993. There being an ambiguity
under the provisions of the Act, the Rules and the GSR
Notification 570(E) dated 25th August, 1993 issued by the
passport authority, the Division Bench of the Bombay High
Court has clarified the said ambiguity in case of Narendra K.
Ambwani (Supra). This Court is also of the considered opinion
that the passport authorities do not have any authority to decide
whether the accused has a right to travel abroad and such
authority is only vested in the Ld. Trial Court which can impose
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14931/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/11/2025
undefined
conditions if an application is made seeking permission to travel
abroad. This Court is also of the considered opinion that the
directions issued by the High Court of Mumbai are binding upon
the passport authorities to renew the passport for a period of ten
years as per the Act and the Rules.
9. In view of the aforesaid reasons and observations, the
respondent authorities are directed to renew the passport of the
petitioner for a period of 10 years as and when petitioner makes
an application for the renewal of passport. However, it is clarified
that if the petitioner has to undertake any travel abroad, the
petitioner will have to make appropriate application to the
concerned learned Trial Court seeking permission to travel
abroad, which shall decide the same on its own merits and may
impose such conditions as it deems fit and proper in case of the
petitioner.
With the aforesaid directions, the present Special Civil
Application is allowed, and accordingly stands disposed. Rule is
made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct Service is permitted.
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.)
KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN
