Krishna Chiranjeevi Rao Palukuri Venkata vs The Union of India and others. Writ Petition 9141/2020 decided on 1 October 2020.
Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/343236/1/WP9141-20-01-10-2020.pdf
Relevant Paragraphs: 10. As per Section 6 of the Passport Act, 1967, the Passport Authority shall refuse to make an endorsement for visiting any country under Clause (b) or (c) of Sub-Section 2 of Section 6 of the said Act on any or more of the grounds mentioned in Section 6 of the Act.
11.A reading of Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act indicates that, the passport authority shall refuse to issue a passport or travel document for visiting any foreign country, if a criminal proceeding is pending against the applicant in India . However, the said provision does not provide for refusing to issue a passport for a person who intends to travel back to India . Hence, reading of this provision clearly indicates that it is applicable only for issuing a fresh passport and not for renewal of passport and this view is fortified by the decision of the Delhi High Court rendered in the case of Ashok Khanna –vs- Central Bureau of Investigation (265 (2019) DLT 614). Delhi High Court while interpreting Section 6 of the Passport Act, 1967 has held that the Passport Authority can refuse to issue passport or an endorsement for visiting any country but nowhere in the provision it is mentioned that even for renewal of passport, the Authority can refuse to renew the passport.
13. In the instant case, petitioner is seeking for renewal for his passport, therefore, said request cannot be rejected by taking shelter under Section 6(2)(f) of the Act and Notification bearing No.G.S.R 570 (E) dated 25.8.1993 issued by the Ministry External Affairs, Government of India.
15. The Apex Court in the case of Satwant Singh Sawhney supra, has held that under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, no person can be deprived of his right to travel except according to procedure established by law. Hence, Petitioner’s right to travel cannot be curtailed on the pretext that a criminal case is pending against him by refusing to renew his passport.
16. The Apex Court in the case Suresh Nanda –vs- CBI supra has held that despite criminal case filed against the petitioner therein he was entitled to hold the passport since the passport had not been impounded in accordance with law. Hence, merely because a criminal case is pending against the Petitioner, he cannot be disqualified from holding a passport, when admittedly his passport has not been impounded under Section 10(3) of the Passport Act.
19. For the aforesaid discussion , I am of the view that the Petitioner is entitled for renewal of his passport for a limited period subject to certain terms and conditions.
Compiled by S. Basavaraj, Advocate, Daksha Legal.
Daksha Legal 