IT Act | Ambiguity in statutory notices undermines the principles of natural justice: Delhi High Court Dismisses Revenue Appeals Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction Under NDPS Act: Procedural Lapses Insufficient to Overturn Case Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Murder Accused, Points to Possible Suicide Pact in "Tragic Love Affair" Tampering With Historical Documents To Support A Caste Claim Strikes At The Root Of Public Trust And Cannot Be Tolerated: Bombay High Court Offense Impacts Society as a Whole: Madras High Court Denies Bail in Cyber Harassment Case Custody disputes must be resolved in appropriate forums, and courts cannot intervene beyond legal frameworks in the guise of habeas corpus jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Insubordination Is A Contagious Malady In Any Employment And More So In Public Service : Karnataka High Court imposes Rs. 10,000 fine on Tribunal staff for frivolous petition A Show Cause Notice Issued Without Jurisdiction Cannot Withstand Judicial Scrutiny: AP High Court Sets Aside Rs. 75 Lakh Stamp Duty Demand Timely Action is Key: P&H HC Upholds Lawful Retirement at 58 for Class-III Employees Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226 Not Applicable to Civil Court Orders: Patna High Court Uttarakhand High Court Dissolves Marriage Citing Irretrievable Breakdown, Acknowledges Cruelty Due to Prolonged Separation Prosecution Must Prove Common Object For An Unlawful Assembly - Conviction Cannot Rest On Assumptions: Telangana High Court Limitation | Litigants Cannot Entirely Blame Advocates for Procedural Delays: Supreme Court Family's Criminal Past Cannot Dictate Passport Eligibility: Madhya Pradesh High Court Double Presumption of Innocence Bolsters Acquittal When Evidence Falls Short: Calcutta High Court Upholds Essential Commodities Act TIP Not Mandatory if Witness Testimony  Credible - Recovery of Weapon Not Essential for Conviction Under Section 397 IPC: Delhi High Court University’s Failure to Amend Statutes for EWS Reservation Renders Advertisement Unsustainable: High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh Quashes EWS Reservation in University Recruitment Process

Family's Criminal Past Cannot Dictate Passport Eligibility: Madhya Pradesh High Court

25 November 2024 2:59 PM

By: sayum


Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled against the denial of passports based solely on the criminal antecedents of the applicants' family members. Justice Subodh Abhyankar emphasized the constitutional guarantee of equality and directed the passport authorities to reassess the applications, reiterating that a person's eligibility must hinge on their individual character verification, not the misdeeds of relatives.

"Criminal Background of Husband or Father-in-Law Cannot Reflect on Applicant"

The Court firmly rejected the rationale employed by authorities in denying passports to the petitioners, stating:

"The criminal antecedents of her husband and father-in-law cannot be taken into account to assess her character and her application for issuance of a passport, as the respondents are required to pass the order only on the basis of the petitioner’s character verification, and not that of her husband or father-in-law’s criminal antecedents."

Justice Abhyankar's ruling came in light of an earlier direction in 2021, where the Court had ordered the authorities to reassess a similar application by the petitioner Farzana Bano without factoring in prior adverse reports. However, the authorities once again denied her application, citing the same reasons, which the Court found to be in "cavalier disregard" of its prior order.

Farzana Bano and her son, Mohd Wazib Chhipa, approached the High Court after their passport applications were rejected due to alleged "criminal family backgrounds." Authorities highlighted the involvement of Bano's husband and father-in-law in multiple narcotics and criminal cases under the NDPS Act. However, the petitioners themselves had no criminal cases against them.

Farzana's earlier application had also been rejected on similar grounds, leading her to file W.P. No. 10154/2021. In that case, the Court directed a fresh assessment without considering her family's criminal history. Despite this, the authorities persisted with the same justification in their rejection dated November 17, 2022.

The Court underscored the constitutional protection granted to all citizens, stating:

"The petitioner also enjoys all the fundamental rights as any other citizen of this country."

The judge criticized the passport authorities for their failure to adhere to the 2021 directive and noted:

"It is apparent that the respondents have not cared to comply with the order passed by this Court… and have passed the order in a cavalier manner."

Rejecting the authorities' reasoning, the Court reiterated that the assessment for passport issuance must strictly be based on the applicant's own criminal record, not that of their relatives.

Relief GrantedThe High Court quashed the rejection order of November 17, 2022, directing the authorities to reassess the petitioners' cases within four weeks and issue passports if no individual disqualification exists. The Court further instructed the authorities to complete the entire process within six weeks, ensuring no undue delays.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court's decision serves as a significant affirmation of individual rights, ruling that family associations cannot unjustly curtail a citizen's freedoms. By directing compliance with constitutional principles and prior orders, the judgment safeguards against arbitrary administrative actions and ensures equitable treatment under the law.

Date of Decision: November 7, 2024

Similar News