Prior Permission From Court Not Required For Issue Of Passport Where Criminal Cases Are Pending: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court has clarified that individuals facing pending criminal cases do not require prior permission from courts for the issuance of passports.

The Division Bench of Justice Alok Mathur and Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal stated that the competent authority under Section 5 of the Passports Act is mandated to decide on passport applications.

The Bench emphasized that the passport authority must evaluate each application on its merits. If deemed appropriate under Section 5 of the Passports Act, the authority should grant the passport. Conversely, if grounds under Section 6 of the Act necessitate refusal, an appropriate order should be passed.

The Court underscored that there exists no provision in the Indian Passport Act requiring individuals with pending criminal cases to seek prior court permission for passport issuance. "This Court is of the considered view that no prior permission from the competent court is required where the criminal cases are pending for issue of passport under the Indian Passport Act and no such provision has been envisaged in the said Act," the Bench observed. 

The ruling stemmed from a Writ Petition filed by Umapati, whose passport application was stalled due to two pending criminal cases against him. The two criminal cases were registered for offences under Sections 323, 504, 506, 427, and 336 of the IPC in Sultanpur.

Deputy Solicitor General SB Pandey, representing the government, argued that Umapati should seek permission from the respective courts handling his criminal cases.

However, the Court countered this argument, stating that court permission is only necessary if there are plans to travel abroad. "The scheme of the Act clearly demonstrate that the application for issuance of passport has to be considered and decided by the passport authority as per Section 5(2) of the Act of 1967, and there is further provision of an appeal against order passed under Section 5(2) of the Act of 1967 is provided under Section 11 of the Act of 1967," it said. 

Rejecting objections raised by the Deputy Solicitor General, the Court reiterated that once an application for a passport is submitted, the passport authority is obligated to decide on it as per the statutory provisions. The Bench also directed the passport authority to promptly consider and decide Umapati's application in accordance with the law.

The Court said, "...the competent authority under the Indian Passport Act is. under a mandate to take a decision as per Sections 5. If he is of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of a passport, he may pass an appropriate order for issuance of the passport and in case he feels that conditions exists for refusal for grant of the passport he may pass an appropriate order considering grounds of Section 6 of Indian Passport Act."

"The respondent No. 4 is directed to consider and decide the application preferred by the petitioner dated 20.01.2022 in accordance withe law expeditiously, say, within a period of four weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him. In light of the aforesaid observations / directions, the writ petition stands allowed," the Court ordered. 

Cause Title: Umapati v. Union Of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Of External Affairs New Delhi And 3 Others [Neutral Citation No- 2024:AHC-LKO:44148-DB]

Appearance:-

Petitioner: Advocate Deepak Kumar

Respondent: Deputy Solicitor General of India, S B Pandey 

Click here to read/download the Order