[Cites 15, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ankit Wadhwani vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 March, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:20551
1 MCRC-55519-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIMANSHU JOSHI
ON THE 13th OF MARCH, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 55519 of 2025
ANKIT WADHWANI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Priyank Khandelwal - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Pushpanjali Dwivedi - PL for the respondent-State.
ORDER
The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the order dated 02.06.2025 passed by
Revisional Court in Cr.R. No.7/2025 affirming the order dated 22.04.2025
passed by learned trial Court in Criminal Case No.676/2021 whereby
application seeking permission from the Court to renewal of passport has
been rejected against.
2. It is submitted by counsel for petitioner that petitioner is facing trial
for offence under Sections 342, 294, 323, 506 of IPC. Since the passport of
petitioner was going to expire, therefore he had filed an application for
renewal of his passport. However, the Regional Passport Office, Bhopal by
order dated 10.10.2019 has refused to renew the passport in absence of
NOC/ permission from the Court regarding issuance of passport facilities.
The petitioner has approached the trial Court via filing an application for
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:20551
2 MCRC-55519-2025
obtaining NOC which was dismissed and affirmed by the Revisional Court.
3. By referring to the notification issued by Ministry of External
Affairs dated 25/08/1993, it is submitted by counsel for petitioner that
permission of the Court would be required only when a person wants to
depart from India and not for renewal of passport. It is submitted
that petitioner would certainly seek permission from the concerning Court in
case if he decides to travel abroad.
4. Per contra, petition is vehemently opposed by counsel for the
respondents.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
6. The Ministry of External Affairs has issued the notification
dated 10/10/2019 which reads as under:-
No. VI/401/1/5/2019
Government of India
Ministry of External Affairs
PSP Division
Patiala House Annexe, Tilak Marg
New Delhi, the 10th October 2019
OFFICE МЕМОRANDUM
Subject: Issue of passports to applicants against whom criminal cases
are pending before a court of law in India.
Reference is invited to Notification No. GSR 570(E) dated 25.8.1993
regarding issuance of passports to applicants who have criminal
proceedings pending against them and whose applications would attract
the provisions of clause (f) of sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the
Passports Act, 1967.
2. GSR 570(E) dated 25.8.1993 is reproduced below for reference:
GSR 570(E) - In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of
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. GSR 298(E) dated the 14th April 1976, the
Central Government, being of the opinion that it is necessary in public
înterest 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 subsection (2) of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:20551
3 MCRC-55519-2025
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;
(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 renewed 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
only on the basis of a fresh court order specifying a further period of
validity of the passport or specifying a period for travel abroad;
(d) the said citizen shall given 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.
3. It may be noted that applicants may be refused passports only on
grounds mentioned under Section 6(2) of the Passports Act, 1967.
Section 6(2)(f) of the Act states that the passport authority shall refuse
to issue a passport or travel document to an applicant on the ground
that proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been
committed by the applicant are pending before a criminal court in
India. GSR 570(E) dated 25.8.1993 was introduced to give relief to
such applicants against whom criminal proceedings are pending before
any Court of law in India but who may need to travel abroad for some
urgent business. With an undertaking under GSR 570(E) and an order
from the Court, an applicant could be issued a short validity passport
of one year validity or for the period specified by the Court.
4. It has been noticed that there are an increasing number of references
being received regarding passport applications attracting Section 6(2)
(f). It has also been brought to Ministry's notice that there are a number
of complex issues involved while processing such applications. During
the proceedings in a recent court case, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi
in W.P. (CRL) No. 2844/2018 /CRL.M.A 48674/2018 has directed that
guidelines be issued by the Ministry reiterating the procedure for
processing of such applications and emphasizing that such applications
need to be processed with due care and diligence.
5. In view of the above, the following instructions may be adopted
while processing the passport applications in respect of those
applicants who may have criminal proceedings pending before a
criminal court in India:
(i) The provisions of GSR 570(E) may be strictly applied in all cases.
GSR 570(E) is a statutory notification and hence forms part of the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:20551
4 MCRC-55519-2025
Rules. It is to be noted that as per Section 5(2) of the Passports Act,
1967, the passport authority shall by order in writing take a decision
whether to issue or refuse a passport, after making such inguiry, if any,
as it may consider necessary. Moreover, Section 7 of the Passports Act,
provides that a passport or travel document may be issued for a shorter
period than the prescribed period if the passport authority, for reasons
to be communicated in writing to the applicant, considers in any case
that the passport or travel document should be issued for a shorter
period. Rule 12 of the Passport Rules, 1980 only states that an ordinary
passport shall be in force for a period of 10 years which implies that an
ordinary passport cannot be issued beyond a period of 10 years.
ii) Whenever an applicant is submitting a 'No Objection Certificate'
(NOC) from a Court of law in India, the applicant should be advised
that undertaking as per GSR 570(E) should be complete in all respects
and should mention all the pending criminal cases against the
applicant. The undertaking will have a note clearly stating that if any
false or incomplete information is submitted by an applicant, then his
passport application is liable to be rejected.
(iii) Extant instructions clearly lay down that such applications should
be processed on pre-Police Verification (PV) mode. "Pre-PV" would
be mandatory in all cases of applications submitted with GSR 570(E) to
ensure that the undertaking submitted by the applicant is properly
matched with the criminal cases mentioned in the Police Verification
Report (PVR). Hence, such applications should not be accepted under
Tatkaal nor such applications be moved to "post-PV" mode or "No-
PV" mode without proper justification and approval to be recorded in
writing.
(iv) If an undertaking is incomplete or misleading and the applicant is
found to have suppressed details of other criminal cases against the
applicant, a Show Cause Notice should be issued to the applicant and
action initiated against that applicant as per provisions of Section 12 of
the Passports Act, 1967. information that an applicant has obtained a
passport by making a false submission or by suppressing material facts
comes to light after the passport has been issued, the passport may be
impounded or revoked as per provision of Section 10(3) (b) of the
Passports Act, 1967, after following the due procedure.
(v) In case where the first Police Verification(PV) is 'Adverse',
secondary police verification may be generated. While a secondary PV
is generated, it should be accompanied by a detailed letter seeking
clarification regarding the pending criminal cases against the applicant
and the status of these cases. Apart from generating secondary PVR,
the passport officers may, if considered necessary, call for discreet
enquiry through the police authorities by sending the court order
submitted by the applicant or even seek verification from other
government agencies/departments, as the case may be.
(vi) In case where the secondary Police Verification is also 'Adverse', it
may be examined whether the details brought out in the police report
match the undertaking submitted by the applicant. It may be noted that
mere filing of FIRs and cases under investigation do not come under
the purview of Section 6(2)(f) and that criminal proceedings would
only be considered pending against an applicant if a case has been
registered before any Court of law and the court has taken cognizance
of the same.
(vii) If the details given in the police report and the undertaking
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:20551
5 MCRC-55519-2025
submitted by the applicant are matching, then the 'No Objection
Certificate' issued by a Court of law submitted by the applicant would
take precedence over any 'Adverse report submitted by the police. In
such cases, the 'Adverse' report may be overruled with the written
approval of the Passport Officer.
(viii) If the details given in the PVR and the undertaking submitted by
the applicant are at variance, then a notice may be issued to the
applicant calling for clarification and advising the applicant to submit
details of all pending
(ix) If it is brought to the notice of the authority that an applicant has
criminal proceedings arrayed against applicant before several courts of
law, then the applicant may be advised to get NOC from all the
concerned court(s). Normally, the Court Order would make a mention
of the cases pending against the applicant as well as the prayer made by
the applicant. This may be examined along with the undertaking
submitted by the applicant and complaints or other court orders, if any,
that may have been received against the applicant.
(x) It may noted that GSR 570(E) only exempts an applicant from the
operation of Section 6(2)(f) and none of the other sub-sections of
Section 6(2) of the Passports Act, 1967.
(xi) A revised Undertaking under GSR 570(E) is attached at Annexure
'A'.
(xii) Passport Officers may issue an internal SOP along the above lines
so that there is no confusion in handling of applications that would
attract provisions of section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967.
6. The above instructions may be noted for strict compliance with
immediate effect.
(Arun Kumar Chatterjee)
Joint Secretary (PSP) &
Chief Passport Officer
All Passport Issuing Authorities in India and Abroad
7. From the aforesaid notification, it is clear that the passport shall be
issued to a person who is facing trial who produces NOC from the Court
concerned. Thus, there is primary restriction to get the passport renewed
without obtaining NOC from the concerned Criminal Court. .
8. It is submitted by counsel for petitioner that at present he does not
have any plans to travel abroad and an undertaking was also given that in
case if he intends to go abroad, then he would seek prior permission from the
Court.
9. In the case of Mahesh Kumar Agrawal Vs. Union Of India, reported
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:20551
6 MCRC-55519-2025
in 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1238, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that
"Liberty, in our constitutional scheme, is not a gift of the State but its first
obligation. The freedom of a citizen to move, to travel, to pursue livelihood
and opportunity, subject to law, is an essential part of the guarantee under
Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The State may, where statute so
provides, regulate or restrain that freedom in the interests of justice, security
or public order but such restraint must be narrowly confined to what is
necessary, proportionate to the object sought to be achieved, and clearly
anchored in law. When procedural safeguards are converted into rigid
barriers, or temporary disabilities are allowed to harden into indefinite
exclusions, the balance between the power of the State and the dignity of the
individual is disturbed, and the promise of the Constitution is put at risk."
10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court further held that "pendency of a
criminal case is not an absolute bar to the renewal of a passport if the
concerned criminal courts have granted "no objection" or permission for
such renewal - Clarified that the requirement for "permission to depart from
India" under GSR 570(E) does not necessitate a concrete schedule for an
immediate journey; rather, it is satisfied if the criminal court allows renewal
while retaining control over travel through bail conditions or specific
directives. Denial of renewal when judicial safeguards are in place
constitutes an unreasonable restriction on personal liberty under Article 21."
11. Upon consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, and
in the interest of justice, it is hereby found appropriate that the accused be
granted a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for the purpose of obtaining a
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:20551
7 MCRC-55519-2025
passport. However, to ensure the continued presence of the accused during
the course of proceedings and to safeguard the administration of justice, it is
directed that in the event the accused intends to travel outside the country, he
shall seek prior permission from this Court. Such permission shall be granted
only upon due application and subject to such conditions as the Court may
deem fit to impose.
12. Accordingly, the order dated 02.06.2025 passed by Revisional
Court in Cr.R. No.7/2025 as well as 22.04.2025 passed by learned trial
Court, to the extent of denying NOC to renew the passport are hereby set
aside. The trial Court is directed to issue 'NOC' to the petitioner for the
limited purpose to get the passport renewed.
13. With the aforesaid, petition stands disposed off.
(HIMANSHU JOSHI)
JUDGE
mn
