Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Eligibility Flows from Birth, Not a Certificate Date: Delhi High Court Strikes Down Rule Fixing Arbitrary Cut-Off for OBC-NCL Certificates in CAPF (AC) Recruitment Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Madras High Court Sets Aside Passport Denial, Directs Accused to Seek Court Permission for Travel Abroad

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Madras High Court, in a significant ruling, addressed the nexus between pending criminal proceedings and the eligibility for passport issuance. The Court's decision revolved around the interpretation and application of Sections 5(2) and 6(2) of the Passports Act, 1967, and the Ministry of External Affairs notification GSR.570(E) dated 25.08.1993.

The petitioner, Rajkumar, challenged the refusal to issue a passport due to a pending criminal case (Cr.No.44 of 2022). The Regional Passport Officer had issued a show cause notice, citing the suppression of information about the pending case in the passport application. The primary issue was whether a passport could be issued to a person with ongoing criminal proceedings.

Justice V.Bhavani Subbaroyan, while assessing the matter, referred to the precedents in N.Chandrababu vs. the Sub Inspector of Police and Noushad Thazhaith vs. State, which established guidelines for passport issuance to individuals with pending criminal cases. The Court observed, "In the light of these legal provisions...it is incumbent upon the petitioner to obtain permission from the court where the criminal case is pending for traveling abroad." The Court further added that "a balance must be struck between the individual’s right to travel and the interests of justice."

The judgment underscored the application of Sections 5(2) and 6(2) of the Passports Act, 1967. These sections empower the passport authority to refuse passport issuance in cases where criminal proceedings are pending. Additionally, the Court highlighted the MEA notification GSR.570(E), which provides a mechanism for individuals with pending cases to obtain passports, subject to certain conditions.

The High Court set aside the order of the Regional Passport Officer dated 05.01.2024 and directed the petitioner to seek permission from the court handling his criminal case for traveling abroad and passport issuance. The petitioner was also instructed to participate in the criminal proceedings and inform the court about the High Court's orders.

Dated : 01.02.2024

Rajkumar vs. The Regional Passport Officer & Anr.

 

 

Latest Legal News