NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3141 of 2020 Ajay Kumar Jaiswal, S/o Shri Awadh Ram Jaiswal, Aged About 42 Years R/o. Ward No.14, Chauratola, Meduka Tahsil, Pendra Road, Meduka, District - Gaurela - Pendra - Marwahi Chhattisgarh - 495117., District : Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner Versus 1 - Union Of India, Through The Secretary, Ministry Of External Affairs, South Block, New Delhi - 110011, District : New Delhi, 2 - The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, 1st Floor, Commercial Complex, Sector - 4, Pandit Deen Dayal Upadhyay Nagar, Raipur - 492010, Chhattisgarh, 3 - Assistant Passport Officer, Regional Passport Service Center, Shyam Plaza, Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - Superintendent Of Police, District - Gaurela - Pendra - Marwahi Chhattisgarh - 495117., District : Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi, Chhattisgarh --- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Kshitj Sharma, Advocate For Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 : Shri Niraj Baghel,Advocate. For Respondent No. 4 : Shri Topilal Bareth, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order on Board 09/01/2026 1. Following relief has been claimed in this writ petition:- 10.1. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the records pertaining to the subject matter for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court; ASHISH TIWARI Digitally signed by ASHISH TIWARI Date: 2026.01.14 17:19:44 +0530 -2- 10.2. The Hon'ble Court may further kindly be pleased to issue such writ / orders/direction of appropriate nature, quashing the impugned remarks of imposition of fine of Rs. 6000/- and further directing the Respondents to expeditiously process the application of the petitioner for passport within such stipulated time, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit; 10.3. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue such writ /orders / direction directing the respondent authorities to issue the passport to the petitioner, after verification if any, within such stipulated time, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit; 10.4. Cost of the petition may also be granted to the petitioner; 10.5. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper, may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice. 2. Fact of the case which emerges from the pleadings are that the present writ petition is being filed against the impugned remark at the time of scrutiny application for passport, thereby imposing a fine of Rs. 6000/- upon the petitioner. Allegedly for 'suppressing material fact' in his application. 3. Also against the acts of omission and commission of the Respondents, wherein the processing of the passport has been unduly and unreasonably being delayed. 4. The short question involved in the present petition is whether the right of the petitioner of free movement can be kept in abeyance due to the ill coordination and inaction on the part of the Respondents. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner made an application to respondent No.2 for issuance of a passport in favour of the petitioner. The said application was not adhere to as according to respondent No.2 there was an adverse Police report. He further submits that before submission of the application for issuance of passport, a criminal -3- case which was pending against the petitioner as culminated into his acquittal by the judgment dated 07/05/2018 in Cr.A. No. 3/2018 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pendraroad, Bilaspur (C.G.) and not consideration of the passport by the respondent No.2 was bad in law and this writ petition filed for seeking above stated relief. 6. Return on behalf of respondents has been filed indicating therein the application filed by the petitioner for issuance of passport has already been closed by them. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that either petitioner is require to challenged that order or he may be permitted to make a fresh application for issuance of passport to the concerned respondent which may be decided on its own merits in accordance with law. This proposition is not opposed by the learned counsel for the respondents and submits that if afresh application is made by the petitioner, the same shall be dealt with and decided in accordance with law. 7. In view of the above, the petitioner is at liberty to move a fresh application to the concerned respondent for issuance of passport and it is expected that the the same shall be dealt-with and decided in accordance with law within a stipulated time as provided under the relevant statute. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge Ashish