Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Issuance, Renewal, or Re-Issuance Must Adhere to Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act: High Court of Karnataka Upholds Passport Denial in Criminal Cases

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a noteable judgment, the High Court of Karnataka has upheld the decision of the Regional Passport Office to deny the issuance of a normal validity passport to an individual involved in ongoing criminal proceedings. The case, Shri B.R. Swamynathan v. Union of India & Others, became a focal point in interpreting the applicability of the Passports Act, 1967 in such scenarios.

The court meticulously reviewed the Act, especially Sections 2(e), 3, 5, 6, 7, 10, and 22, concluding that “issuance, renewal, or re-issuance of a passport must adhere to the stipulations of Section 6, particularly sub-section (2)(f).” This section restricts issuing passports to individuals with pending criminal cases, a significant point in the judgment.

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna, presiding over the case, also shed light on the Government of India's GSR 570 Notification. This notification allows for the issuance of short validity passports under specific conditions, including obtaining permission from the concerned court. The judgment states, “This is subject to specific conditions, such as the period of passport validity aligning with the court's order.”

This verdict takes into account various judicial interpretations and precedents, notably the Delhi High Court’s judgment in Ashok Khanna v. Central Bureau of Investigation and the Andhra Pradesh High Court’s ruling in Kadar Valli Shaik v. Union of India. The latter aligns with the stringent application of Section 6(2)(f) for renewal cases and was considered authoritative in this judgment.

High Court rejected the petitioner’s request for a regular, 10-year validity passport. Upholding the endorsement by the Regional Passport Office, the court advised the petitioner to seek a short validity passport from the concerned court, in compliance with the Act and GSR 570 Notification. The court clarified that the request for a short validity passport should not be denied solely based on the pending criminal case.

Date of Decision: 17th January, 2024

SHRI. B.R.SWAMYNATHAN  VS THE UNION OF INDIA

 

Latest Legal News