Punjab-Haryana High Court
Manjit Singh Bedi vs State Of Punjab And Others on 3 July, 2024
Author: Anoop Chitkara
Bench: Anoop Chitkara
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:087188
CRM-M-28260-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-28260-2024
Date of Decision: 03.07.2024
Manjit Singh Bedi ...Pe oner
Versus
State of Punjab and others ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present: Mr. Inderjit Sharma, Advocate
for the pe oner.
Ms. Swa Batra, D.A.G., Punjab
for respondents No.1,5 and 6.
Ms. Shreyansi Verma, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
****
ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No. Dated Police Sta on Sec ons
0006 12.07.2012 Vigilance Bureau, 406 r/w 34 IPC and 13(1) (d),
Amritsar 13(2) of PC Act
1. Seeking direc ons against Union of India, Ministry of External Affairs to renew
the pe oner's passport which has been withheld because of the pe oner's convic on
in the FIR cap oned above and also for issuance of No Objec on Cer ficate by
respondents No.3 and 4 i.e. Regional Passport Authority, Jalandhar and Passport and
Immigra on Office, Amritsar, the pe oner has come up before this Court under
Sec on 482 CrPC.
2. I have heard counsel for the par es to ascertain whether the present pe on is
worth issuing no ce or not.
3. Pe oner was arraigned as an accused in the above cap oned FIR. In the said
FIR, the pe oner was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for
03 years under Sec on 406 r/w 34 IPC. Challenging the convic on vide judgment/order
of sentence dated 11.04.2023 passed by Special Judge, the pe oner filed an appeal
CRA-S No.1298 of 2023 before this Court which is pending and his sentence was
suspended vide order dated 03.05.2023.
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:087188
CRM-M-28260-2024
4. Pe oner's case is that his son is a ci zen of Australia and he needs to visit him,
however the respondents No.3 and 4 are siIng over his passport and are not taking any
decision on the passport for renewal. Ini ally, the pe oner was issued passport
bearing no. H3162992 on 19.02.2009 which was valid upto 18.02.2019. However the
passport expired and it was not renewed and in the mean me, the pe oner got
convicted. Now he has sought renewal of the passport and according to the pe oner,
the respondents No.3 and 4 are not taking any decision on the same. The renewal of
passport to a convict is subject to the provisions of Passport Act.
5. Perusal of the pe on does not refer to any representa on or applica on which
the pe oner has filed under Passport Act, 1967 for renewal. Pe oner's case is that a
no fica on dated 25.08.1993 has been issued by Ministry of External Affairs about the
requirements and procedures to be followed for renewal of passport for convicts,
however the respondents No.3 and 4 are not taking any decision even on the said
no fica on. It shall be appropriate to reproduce the said no fica on which reads as
follows:-
"MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
NOTIFICATION
New Delhi, the 25th August, 1993
G.S.R. 570(E) - In exercise of the powers conferred by clause
(a) of Sec on 22 of the Passports Act 1967 (15 of 1967) and in
supersession of the no fica on 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
ci zens of India against whom proceedings in respect of an
offence alleged to have been commiOed by them are pending
before a criminal court in India and who produce orders from
the court concerned permiIng them to deposit from India,
from the opera on of the provisions of Clause (f) of sub-sec on
(2) of Sec on 6 of the said Act, subject to the following
condi ons, namely:-
(a) the passport to be issued to every ci zen 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
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:087188
CRM-M-28260-2024
(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 given 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 renewed for one year at a me, provided
the applicant has not travelled abroad for the period
men oned by the court; and provided further that, in the
mean me, 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 ci zen shall give an undertaking in wri ng to
the passport issuing authority that he shall, if required by the
court concerned, appear before it at any me during the
con nuance in force of the passport so issued."
6. Given above, the respondents No.3 and 4 are directed to renew the passport of
the pe oner expedi ously in the light of official no fica ons which are in force.
7. Pe on stands disposed of. All pending applica ons, if any, stand disposed.
(ANOOP CHITKARA)
JUDGE
03.07.2024
Jyo Sharma
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether reportable: No.
3 of 3
