Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court Illicit Affair Alone Cannot Make a Man Guilty of Abetting Suicide: Supreme Court Quashes Charge Under Section 306 IPC Landlord Cannot Be Punished for Slowness of Courts: Supreme Court on Bonafide Need in Eviction Suits Expect States To Enact Laws Regulating Unlicensed Money Lenders Charging Exorbitant Interest Contrary To 'Damdupat': Supreme Court Accused Who Skips Lok Adalat After Seeking It, Then Cries 'Prejudice', Cannot Claim Apprehension of Denial of Justice: Madras High Court Refuse To Transfer Case IO Cannot Act Without Prior Sanction: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail, Flags Procedural Lapse in Religious Conversion Case Electricity Board Strictly Liable For Unprotected Transformer, 7-Year-Old Cannot Be Guilty Of Contributory Negligence: Allahabad High Court POCSO Conviction Can't Stand For Offence Not Charged: Delhi High Court Member of Unlawful Assembly Cannot Escape Conviction By Claiming He Only Carried a Lathi and Struck No One: Allahabad High Court Jurisdiction Cannot Be Founded On Casual Or Incidental Facts If Not Have A Direct Nexus With The Lis: : Delhi High Court Clause Stating Disputes "Can" Be Settled By Arbitration Is Not A Binding Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court State Cannot Plead Helplessness Against Sand Mafia; Supreme Court Warns Of Paramilitary Deployment, Complete Mining Ban In MP & Rajasthan Authority Cannot Withdraw Subsidy Citing Non-Compliance When It Ignored Repeated Requests For Inspection: Supreme Court Out-of-State SC/ST/OBC Candidates Cannot Claim Rajasthan's Reservation Benefits in NEET PG Counselling: Rajasthan High Court Supreme Court Upholds Haryana's Regularisation Of Qualified Ad Hoc Staff As 'One-Time Measure', Strikes Down Futuristic Cut-Offs

High Court Clarifies Passport Denial in Post-Conviction or Post-Acquittal Proceedings

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Hon’ble High Court, in a recent judgment delivered by Justice Jagmohan Bansal, has clarified the applicability of Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act, 1967, in post-conviction or post-acquittal proceedings. The verdict sheds light on the interpretation and scope of the law, highlighting the impact of constitutional rights on passport issuance decisions.

The court categorically stated, “Clause (f) of Section 6(2) of Passport Act, 1967 is inapplicable to post-conviction or post-acquittal proceedings. As soon as a person is convicted or acquitted, he would be governed by Clause (e) of Section 6(2) of the 1967 Act.”

The case arose from several petitions seeking the issuance or renewal of passports after being convicted or acquitted of criminal offenses. The key contention revolved around the interpretation of Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act, which deals with passport issuance to individuals involved in criminal proceedings.

The court extensively discussed the role of the High Court in criminal matters, relying on a previous judgment and stating, “High Court is not a criminal court in terms of Section 6(2)(f) of the 1967 Act.”

Furthermore, the court emphasized the significance of constitutional rights in the passport issuance process. It cited, “Denial of passport not only amounts to violation of fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 14 & 21 but also freedom of speech, business, and trade contemplated by Article 19(1)(a) and (g) of the Constitution unless and until the procedure prescribed by law is followed.”

The judgment also examined a 1993 notification and 2019 instructions issued by the Central Government to exempt citizens facing criminal proceedings from the operation of Section 6(2)(f). The court clarified that these exemptions were limited to criminal proceedings pending before the trial court and were not applicable to pending appeals.

While delivering the verdict, Justice Jagmohan Bansal highlighted the changing social, scientific, and economic landscape, stating, “With the advancement of technology, improvement of means of communication, globalization of the economy, and an increase in international trade, traveling abroad has substantially increased and become part of life.”

High court directed all passport authorities to consider its observations and findings while processing pending and subsequent applications, aiming to minimize litigation related to passport issues.

Date of Decision:14th July 2023

MOHAN LAL @ MOHNA vs UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

 

Latest Legal News