Executing Court Cannot Go Behind The Decree To Amend Material Discrepancies In Property Area: Madhya Pradesh High Court Section 216 CrPC | No Vested Right For Accused To Seek Alteration Of Charge; Court’s Power Is Exclusive And Discretionary: Jharkhand High Court Violation Of Examination Instructions Regarding OMR Sheets Warrants Mandatory Cancellation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Spurious Pesticides Ruin Lives: Telangana High Court Upholds Detention Of 'Insecticide Offender' For Endangering Public Order No Double Jeopardy In Service Law: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Treating Suspension Period As 'Non-Duty' After Employee Pleaded Guilty Advocates Have No Right To Call For Boycott; Any Such Call Or Obstruction Of Court Work Amounts To Contempt Of Court: Telangana High Court Failure To Establish 'Soon Before Death' Cruelty Precludes Conviction Under Section 304B IPC: Patna High Court Repeated False Police Complaints And Reckless Allegations Against Spouse Constitute Mental Cruelty Entitling Husband To Divorce: Madras High Court State Cannot Deny Arrears Of Pension Merely On Grounds Of Delay Without Considering Medical Evidence: Kerala High Court Allegations Of Continuous Sexual Harassment And Intimidation Require Trial; Proceedings Cannot Be Quashed On Plea Of Previous Enmity: Karnataka High Court Section 138 NI Act | Complainant Must Prove Proprietorship Of Firm To Establish Locus Standi As 'Payee': Himachal Pradesh High Court Advocate-Client Privilege Does Not Grant Immunity From Investigation Into Personal Involvement In Alleged Offence: Delhi High Court Section 302 IPC | Conviction Cannot Be Sustained When Prosecution Fails To Identify Which Specific Accused Delivered Fatal Blow In Group Clash: Gujarat High Court Statutory Interest Under Section 28 Land Acquisition Act Cannot Be Denied For Delay In Filing Amendment Application: Delhi High Court

Cloud Over Applicant Must Walk Away: Karnataka High Court Upholds Passport Denial in Pending Criminal Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Karnataka High Court, presided over by the Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna, has upheld the decision of the Regional Passport Office to deny the re-issuance of a normal validity passport to a petitioner involved in ongoing criminal proceedings. The landmark decision, delivered on December 4, 2023, has profound implications for individuals with pending criminal cases seeking passport services.

The case, titled Santhosh Beejadi Srinivasa vs. Union of India & Others, revolved around the petitioner’s request for the re-issuance of his passport, which was denied due to a pending criminal trial. The petitioner, Mr. Santhosh Beejadi Srinivasa, challenged this decision, invoking Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

In a detailed analysis of the Passports Act, 1967, and related rules and notifications, Justice Nagaprasanna provided a comprehensive interpretation of the legal framework governing passport issuance in India. A key observation made by the court noted, “As long as Section 6(2)(f) stares at any application, be it for fresh, renewal, or re-issuance, such application cannot be directed to be granted, diluting the rigor of Section 6(2)(f).”

The court emphasized the importance of adhering to the legal provisions when considering passport applications against the backdrop of pending criminal proceedings. It was observed that “if an applicant of the kind in the case at hand, wants to walk over the clouds; the cloud over such applicant must walk away.” This statement highlights the necessity for clearing legal hurdles before seeking passport issuance or renewal.

Date of Decision: 04th December 2023

SANTHOSH BEEJADI SRINIVASA VS UNION OF INDIA

Latest Legal News