Ram Kishan Nath vs Union Of India (2025:Rj-Jd:18194)
2025 Latest Caselaw 11308 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 11308 Raj
Judgement Date : 9 April, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Ram Kishan Nath vs Union Of India (2025:Rj-Jd:18194) on 9 April, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:18194]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                  S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18986/2024

Ram Kishan Nath S/o Shri Mohan Nath, aged about 32 Years,
R/o Jasnath Pura, Village- Katariyasar, P.S. Katariyasar, Bambloo,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
                                                                         ----Petitioner
                                        Versus
1.       Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of External
         Affairs, South Block, Secretariat Building, Raisina Hill,
         New Delhi-110011.
2.       Regional Passport Office, J-14, Jhalana Institutional Area,
         Jhalana Doongari, Jaipur, 302051-Rajasthan.
                                                                      ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)             :     Mr. Naman Mohnot
                                    Mr. Himanshu Pareek
For Respondent(s)             :     Mr. Kirta Ram Meghwal



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN

                                         Order

09/04/2025

1.    The challenge in the present writ petition is with regard to

inaction on the part of respondents in re-issuance of passport of

the petitioner.

2.    Background of the facts shows that previously the petitioner

was convicted for offences under the POCSO Act vide judgment

dated 27.01.2016 and he was sentenced to undergo imprisonment

for a period of 10 years. It is stated that the petitioner underwent

the sentence. By virtue of grant of permanent parole to the

petitioner    by      order    dated       15.02.2019,          the    petitioner   was

prematurely released by extending the permanent parole. The

petitioner    filed     an     application        for     reissuing      passport    on


                         (Downloaded on 09/04/2025 at 09:52:51 PM)
 [2025:RJ-JD:18194]                   (2 of 3)                    [CW-18986/2024]



28.05.2024. Inspite of taking sufficient time, the respondents are

not processing the application for re-issuing passport to the

petitioner. In the said circumstances, the present writ petition has

been filed.

3.    Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that initially

a report of police inquiry was sought and after getting the report,

the respondents have ordered for issuance of passport to the

petitioner. However, before the passport is released, a further

report was sought from the police with regard to any offence

committed in between the first report to the date of release of the

passport.

4.    Section 6(2)(e) of the Passport Act, 1967 is relevant in this

regard, which reads as under:

      "6. Refusal of passports, travel documents. etc.
      ....

(2) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the passport authority shall refuse to issue a passport or travel document for visiting any foreign country under clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section 5 on any one or more of the following grounds, and on no other ground, namely: -

....

(e) that the applicant has, at any time during the period of five years immediately preceding the date of his application, been convicted by a court in India for any offence involving moral turpitude and sentenced in respect thereof to imprisonment for not less than two years;"

5. A close reading of the above provision shows that the

passport authority can refuse issuance or re-issuance of a

passport if the applicant has been convicted of an offence and

sentenced to not less than two years, within a period of five years

immediately preceding the date of application.

[2025:RJ-JD:18194] (3 of 3) [CW-18986/2024]

6. In the present case, the petitioner's sentence was completed

and his appeal was also dismissed as infructuous on 12.05.2022.

The petitioner was already prematurely released on 15.02.2019.

From such date to the date of application, there is a gap of five

years. During the said period as per preliminary report received

from the police, the petitioner seems to have not been involved in

any offence. Inspite of such preliminary inquiry report, a fresh

report was sought in between the first report to the date of

release of passport. Considering the long pendency of the

application of the petitioner, the respondents are required to

process the release of the passport forthwith.

7. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents

are directed to release the passport of the petitioner, if no adverse

police report is found against the petitioner, within a period of one

month from the date of receipt of this order.