HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 34994 of 2025 Court No. - 4 HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J. HON'BLE SWARUPAMA CHATURVEDI, J. 1. Heard Mrs. Shabana Nizam, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Sri Harsh Bardhan Choubey, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3. 2. By means of this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding respondent no.2 to consider and dispose of his pending application for the grant of a fresh passport, in light of the judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ-C No.41540 of 2023, Pawan Kumar Rajbhar vs. Union of India & others, in which by Paragraph No.21 the court had held thus:- "21. Therefore, we are inclined to read the word 'proceeding' used in Sections 6 (2) (f) and 10 (3) (e) of the Act to allow minimum scrutiny/application of mind by the jurisdictional Criminal Court under whose territorial jurisdiction a criminal investigation or enquiry or trial may be pending, as may be the case. Thus, where an offence may be pending investigation at a Police Station, the Court/Judicial Magistrate having territorial jurisdiction over that Police Station may grant permission to a person accused of that criminal offence, to travel abroad. Insofar as NCR are concerned, learned A.S.G.I. has categorically and most fairly stated, there is no reason to withhold issuance, renewal or reissue of a passport. The Regional Passport Authority do not and in any case they shall not withhold issuance, renewal or re-issuance of individual passports against report of NCR against any citizen applicant." Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Aamir Nizam, Kamla Srivastava, Shabana Nizam Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., C.S.C., Harsh Bardhan Choubey Shadik Khan .....Petitioner(s) Union Of India And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) (Emphasis Added) 3. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that only a single non- cognizable report (NCR) has been registered against him and no charge sheet has been filed till date. Such pleading has been specifically made in paragraphs 8 and 9 of the writ petition. It is further averred in paragraph 10 that apart from the said NCR, there exists no other criminal history against the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents, including the panel counsel representing the Union of India, submits that they have no objection if the petitioner's application for issuance of passport is directed to be considered and disposed of in accordance with the law laid down by the Division Bench in the case of Pawan Kumar Rajbhar (supra). 5. In view of the above, this writ petition stands disposed of with the direction that the petitioner shall file a certified copy of this order along with a copy of the judgment rendered in Pawan Kumar Rajbhar (supra) before respondent no.2 within a period of two weeks from today. Upon such filing, the concerned authority, i.e., respondent no.2, shall proceed to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s application for issuance of a fresh passport within a further period of two months thereafter, strictly in accordance with law and in the light of the aforesaid judgment. October 7, 2025 Gaurav WRIC No. 34994 of 2025 2 (Swarupama Chaturvedi,J.) (Ajit Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad