Gujarat High Court
Prakash Vadilal Sanghvi vs State Of Gujarat on 10 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/9071/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/10/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9071 of 2025
==========================================================
PRAKASH VADILAL SANGHVI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR NV GANDHI(1693) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR NIKUNJ KANARA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR PRADIP D BHATE(1523) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA
Date : 10/10/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Learned
advocate Mr.Pradip Bhate waives service of Rule
for the respondent No.2 whereas learned
Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Nikunj Kanara
waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of
respondent No.1.
2. The present Special Civil Application
preferred seeking direction to the respondent
authority to process the passport application
No.AH1079546413824 and to renew the passport of
the petitioner for full term of ten years.
3. Learned advocate for the petitioner has
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/9071/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/10/2025
undefined
submitted that under the prevalent rules of the
GSR Notification 570(E) dated 25th August, 1993,
the respondent authority has to renew the
passport of the petitioner. That, the
Petitioner has been charged with offences
punishable u/s. 406, 420, 506(2) r/w.120B of
IPC in connection with FIR bearing CR No. I-
3/2016 registered with Rajkot, A Division
Police Station. That, the said FIR has
culminated into charge sheet and further into
the Criminal Case No. 8101/2016, pending with
the Ld. JMFC, Rajkot. The Petitioner has also
been charged with similar offences under IPC
registered with the same Police Station bearing
CR No.I-246/2016. Learned advocate for the
petitioner submits that the, the Petitioner has
paid his share in favour of first-informant of
the said FIR. That, first-informant of FIR
bearing CR No.I-3/2016 has expired. Moreover,
there is no substantial progress in the trial
since the first-informant and/or their
witnesses are not remaining present during the
trial, as they have been refunded with the full
amount by the Petitioner. That, long time has
been passed. Learned Advocate for the
Petitioner further submits that, the Petitioner
who is settled at Ahmedabad and aged about 72
years is facing difficulties in attending the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/9071/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/10/2025
undefined
court proceedings. The children of the
Petitioner are settled at abroad. That, in view
of the earlier Notification of the Passport
Department, he is not getting renewal of his
passport for more than one year. That, the
passport of the Petitioner was renewed on
20.09.2024 and is expiring on dtd. 19.09.2025.
That, considering the totality of the facts
highlighted hereinabove, moreover, in view of
the recent decision of this Hon'ble Court in
the matter of Harsh Mahesh Tanna v. State of
Gujarat reported in 2025 (0) AIJEL-HC 250700,
the Petitioner has invoked powers and
jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court by directing
the passport authorities to renew the passport
for the term of 10 years. That, pending the
present petition, the Petitioner has applied
for renewal of passport vide his Application
No. No.AH1079546413824 dtd. 15.09.2025. He,
therefore, submits that appropriate direction
be issued to the passport authority so that the
passport of the petitioner be renewed for a
period of ten years and the petitioner has no
intention of absconding.
4. Learned advocate for the petitioner in
support of his submissions has relied upon the
judgment of the Division Bench of Bombay High
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/9071/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/10/2025
undefined
Court reported in case of Narendra K. Ambwani
v. Union of India [2014 SCC Online Bom 356]
wherein the Bombay High Court has issued
guidelines to be followed by the passport
authorities where the Trial Court has directed
that the passport may be renewed as per the
rules. Learned advocate for the petitioner has
further relied upon decision passed by Co-
ordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court in Special
Civil Application no. 14533 of 2023 wherein,
the Hon'ble Court had directed as follows:
"6. Considering the aforesaid submissions
advanced by the learned advocates appearing for
the respective parties, in the opinion of this
Court, the Notification dated 10.10.2019 would
be applicable to the case of the petitioner.
While relegating the petitioner herein to the
respondent authority, in the interest of
justice, the petitioner herein is directed to
produce on record the FIR which is filed and
pending against the petitioner herein before
the respondent authority within a period of two
weeks from the date of receipt of this order
and the application dated 10.12.2022 is
directed to be considered for a period of five
years placing reliance on the Notification
dated 10.10.2019 as referred above. The
decision be taken by the respondent No.2
preferably within a period of four weeks from
the receipt of this order.
7. With the aforesaid directions, the present
petition stands disposed of.
Direct service is permitted.
5. Per contra, learned advocate Mr.Pradip
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/9071/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/10/2025
undefined
D. Bhate for the respondents has submitted that
the passport of the petitioner has been renewed
from time to time in terms of the GSR
Notification 570(E) dated 25th August, 1993. He
submits that in view of said Notification, the
passport authorities have issued the passport as
per the rules and the prevalent notifications. He
submits that, however, there is no restriction on
this Court to issue a direction for issuance of
the passport for a certain period of validity as
per the rules. He, therefore, submits that
appropriate directions be passed accordingly.
6. Considered the submissions and perused
the documents on record.
7. It is not disputed that two FIRs have
been filed against the present petitioner and the
trial is pending before the Trial Court however,
there is no substantial progress in the trial.
That, first-informant of FIR bearing CR No.I-
3/2016 has expired. Moreover, there is no
substantial progress in the trial since the
first-informant and/or their witnesses are not
remaining present during the trial, as they have
been refunded with the full amount by the
Petitioner.
8. The GSR Notification 570(E) dated 25th
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/9071/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/10/2025
undefined
August, 1993 reads as under:
"G.S.R 570 (E)-In exercise of the powers conferred
by clause (a) of the Section 22 of the Passports
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 offences 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 or a period 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
the passport, then the passport shall be
issued for period of travel abroad
specified in the order.
(b) any passport issued in terms of (a) (ii)
and (a) (iii) above can be further renewed for
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/9071/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/10/2025
undefined
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 only on the basis
of 3 fresh court order specifying a further
period of validity of the passport or
specifying a period for 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 in force of the passport so
issued."
9. Clause (ii) thereof states that if there
is no period specified in the order passed by the
Trial Court for issuance of passport, the
passport shall be issued for a period of 1 year.
The said Notification also specifies in Clause
(i) that if the Court specifies the period for
which the passport has to be issued, then the
passport shall be issued for such a specified
period.
9.1 In the present case, the passport
authority only renews the Passport of the
Petitioner for a period of one year at a time.
Therefore, the Petitioner apprehends that, in
absence of any specific order/directions of this
Hon'ble Court, the Passport of the Petitioner
would again be renewed only for a period of one
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/9071/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/10/2025
undefined
year.
10. The Division Bench of the Bombay High
Court in writ petition No.361 of 2014 dated 13th
March, 2014 has held thus:
"10. In the circumstances, we propose to issue
guidelines to be followed by the Respondents on
receipt of the applications for reissue 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 reissue 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 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 26th 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.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/9071/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/10/2025
undefined
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 reissue 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 reissue of the passports of such
accused persons shall continue to
Notification(s).
11. Though the said decision is not binding
on this Court, it has certainly a persuasive
value. In the considered opinion of this Court,
the ratio of the said judgment squarely applies
in the 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/9071/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/10/2025
undefined
any authority to decide whether the accused has a
right to travel abroad and such authority is only
vested in the Trial Court which can impose
conditions if an application is made seeking
permission to travel abroad. This Court is of the
considered opinion that the directions issued by
the Bombay High Court are binding upon the
passport authorities to renew the passport for a
period of ten years as per the Act and the Rules.
12. In view of the aforesaid reasons and
observations, the respondent authorities are
directed to renew the passport of the petitioner
for a period of ten years. However, it is
clarified that if the petitioner has to undertake
any travel abroad, he will have to make
appropriate application to the Trial Court
seeking permission to travel abroad, which shall
impose such conditions as it deems fit and proper
in case of the petitioner.
13. With the aforesaid directions, the
present Special Civil Application is allowed.
Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
(NIRAL R. MEHTA,J)
ANUP
