Telangana High Court

Mahendra Kumar Agarwal vs The Union Of India Ministry Of External ... on 27 March, 2024

Author: Surepalli Nanda

Bench: Surepalli Nanda

      THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

             WRIT PETITION NO.7873 OF 2024
ORDER:

Heard Mr.Nirmal Kumar Pandey, learned counsel

appearing on behalf of the petitioner and

Mr.G.Sreekanth Goud, learned Standing Counsel

representing Mr. Gadi Praveen Kumar, Deputy Solicitor

general of India, appearing on behalf of the respondent

Nos.1 and 2.

2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking

prayer as under:

"...to issue an appropriate Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ to direct the Respondent No.3 to renew the Petitioner Passport bearing No.Z7707558 for 10 years (which is renewed for one year) as per Sec 10 of The Passport Act 1967 and Rule 12 of The Passport Rules 1980 without reference to the Central Government vide, GSR No 570 (E) Dated 25.08.1993 and pass orders deemed fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case".

WP_7873_2024 SN,J

3. The case of the petitioner as per the averments

made by the petitioner in the affidavit filed by the

petitioner in support of the present Writ Petition in

brief, is as follows:

a) It is the specific case of the petitioner that upon the

application filed by the petitioner, the passport authority i.e.

the 3rd respondent herein renewed the passport bearing

No.Z7707558 on 12.02.2024 for a period of one year and the

said validity period expires on 11.02.2025.

b) The grievance of the petitioner is that the 3rd

respondent had granted renewal to the petitioner for a period

of one year and not 10 years. Aggrieved by the same, the

petitioner approached this Court by filing the present writ

petition.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of 3rd respondent

submits that upon the petitioner making a fresh submission

seeking renewal of passport for a period of ten years, the

same will be considered in accordance to law.

5. Admittedly even according to the petitioner, the

petitioner had not made any representation to the 3rd

WP_7873_2024 SN,J

respondent nor filed any application seeking renewal of

passport for ten years.

6. Taking into consideration the submissions made by the

learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 3rd respondent,

this Court opines that the 3rd respondent is bound to consider

the request of the petitioner for renewal of passport for a

period of 10 years, upon the petitioner making a fresh

application to that effect seeking the said relief.

PERUSED THE RECORD.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION:

7. It is the specific case of the petitioner that

pendency of criminal cases against the petitioner

should not lead to denial of passport facilities to the

petitioner and further that petitioner's passport should

be renewed for a period of ten years.

8. This Court opines that mere pendency of criminal

cases should not be a ground to deny passport facilities

to an individual or to hold a passport. Since individual's

personal Right to liberty includes not only individual's

right to travel abroad but also individual's right to hold

WP_7873_2024 SN,J

a passport, for a regular period of ten years on renewal

of the same as per Rule 12 of the Passport Rules, 1980.

9. This Court earlier had an occasion to consider the

Gazette Notification issued by the Central Government

vide GSR No.570 (E) dated 25.08.1993 wherein

instructions were issued to renew the passport only for

a period of one year, in case where criminal cases are

pending, if no time frame is mentioned by the Courts.

This Hon'ble Court, while interpreting the provisions of

the said Gazette Notification and Rule 12 of Passport

Rules 1980, has held that Passports shall be renewed

for a period of ten years in accordance with Rule 12 of

the Passport Rules, 1980. The relevant portion of the

order dated 18.04.2022 passed in W.P.No.11674 of

2022 in particular paras 7, 8, 9 and 10, read as under:

"7. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, it is noticed that where there is criminal case pending against an Indian citizen who is seeking issuance or renewal of passport, the Government of India Notification in GSR 570(E) dt.25.08.1993 is applicable. Accordingly, the petitioner has approached the criminal Court by filing Crl.M.P.No.234 of 2020 and the criminal Court has

WP_7873_2024 SN,J

allowed the Crl.M.P. by directing renewal of passport only for the period the petitioner is eligible. As per the Passport Act and the Rules framed thereunder, a citizen is entitled for issuance of an ordinary passport for a period of 10 years and thereafter, the passport holder will have to make appropriate application for renewal of the passport which is again extendable for a further period of 10 years. The Sessions Judge in the order dt.27.10.2020 has observed that pendency of criminal case against the petitioner cannot be a ground for denying his right to renew his passport. However, it is observed that it should be given only for the period he is eligible. (emphasis supplied by this Court). The usage of word 'eligible connotes that the extension may be for regular period of 10 years as provided in the rules. The judgments on which the petitioner has placed reliance upon are on similar set of facts.

8. In all of those cases, the petitioners therein were frequent travellers and the relevant criminal Court therein had directed for renewal of passport in accordance with the prescribed Rules. As the prescribed Rules permit issuance of passport for 10 years, the Courts have held in favour of the petitioners therein. Therefore, in the case before this Court, as the language used by the Magistrate/Judge is 'eligible', the petitioner is also eligible to be issued passport for a period of 10 years.

WP_7873_2024 SN,J

9. In view of the same, this Court deems it fit and proper to direct the respondents to issue the passport for a period of 10 years under Section 10 of the Passports Act.

10. The Writ Petition is accordingly allowed. No costs."

Similar view had been taken by this Court vide its

order dated 10.11.2023 passed in W.P.No.17965 of

2023.

10. The Division Bench of Bombay High Court in the

Judgment dated 13.03.2014, reported in 2014 SCC

OnLine Bom 356 in "Narendra K. Ambwani v. Union of

India", observed at Paragraph Nos.6 and 7, as under:

"6. This court held that the Rules have been framed under the Passport Act and under Rule 12, a passport other than for a child aged more than 15 years, shall be in force for a period of 10 years or 20 years as the case may be from the date of its issue.

7. In the present case, the Respondents contended that the order of the learned Magistrate did not specify the period for which the passport is issued and in the light of Notification dated 23rd August, 1993 (Annexure "6" to the petition), the passport of the citizen against

WP_7873_2024 SN,J

whom the proceedings are pending in the criminal court in India, shall be issued for a period specified by the court and if no period is specified, the passport shall be renewed for a period of one year. This court held that interpretation of the order of the learned Magistrate dated 20th September, 2006 is contrary to the express language of the order. When the order speaks about renewal of the passport in terms of the Passport Rules, reference must be made to Rule 12 alone and the Passport Officer was bound to issue the passport either for a period of 10 years or for a period of 20 years as the case may be in his discretion. The Passport Officer could not have at any rate renewed the passport for a period less than 10 years. Accordingly, the Rule was made absolute and the Regional Passport Officer was directed to issue the passport, renewed for a period of 10 years or 20 years."

11. Another Judgment dated 30.11.2016 of the

Division Bench of Bombay High Court reported in 2016

SCC OnLine Bom 14539 : (2020) 3 AIR Bom R 459 in

Mr. Samip Nitin Ranjani v. Union of India and others,

observed at relevant paragraphs 3 and 4, as under:

"3. The grievance of the Petitioner is that the Passport Authorities, instead of renewing the passport for a period of 10 years as provided under the

WP_7873_2024 SN,J

provisions of the Passports Act, 1967, has renewed the passport only for a period of one year. Challenging the same, writ was filed.

4. In our view, the ratio of the judgment of this Court in the case of Narendra Ambwani (supra) would squarely apply to the facts of the present case. The Division Bench of this Court has issued guidelines which are to be followed by the Respondents on the receipt of application for renewal of passport. It is observed in paragraphs 10 and 11 as under:

"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 passport 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

WP_7873_2024 SN,J

qualifying applicants are entitled to have passport renewed for at least ten years. The Regional Passport Office shall renew the passports of such qualifying applicants at least 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."

12. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and

circumstances of the case, and duly considering the law

WP_7873_2024 SN,J

laid down by the High Courts in the Judgments

(referred to and extracted above), the petitioner is

directed to make application to the 3rd respondent

within a period of one week from the date of receipt of

the copy of the order requesting the 3rd respondent to

pass appropriate orders on petitioner's application

seeking renewal of passport bearing No.Z7707558 for a

period of ten (10) years and the 3rd respondent upon

receipt of the said application is directed to consider