Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 161357 (ALL)

VIJAY KUMAR v. THE U.O.I. THRU. ITS SECY. MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS NEW DELHI AND ANOTHER

WRIC/8492/2025 · 2025-09-02

Brij Raj Singh, Sangeeta Chandra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 8492 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing counsel who appears for the State-respondent and Shri Varun Pandey, who appears on behalf of the Respondent nos.1, 2 and 3. 2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner for the following main prayer:- "1) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus thereby commanding and directing to the opposite parties especially the opposite party no.2 to issue the passport in favour of the petitioner for specified period in accordance with law, in the interest of justice." 3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner' has applied for a passport on 29.5.2025 bearing application reference no.25-0053001369 to go abroad. Thereafter the petitioner completed his formalities by giving his biometric and thumb impression etc. at Passport office, Lucknow but his application has remained pending. Thereafter, the opposite party no.2 has issued a letter dated 10.7.2025 for clarification required regarding Case Crime No.386/2022 under Sections 147, 149, 323, 427, 435, 504, 506 I.P.C. at Police Station Pura Kalandar, District Ayodhya, within thirty days. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vindeshwri Pandey, Aviral Chandra Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I. Vijay Kumar .....Petitioner(s) The U.O.I. Thru. Its Secy. Ministry Of External Affairs New Delhi And Another .....Respondent(s) 4. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent nos.1, 2 and 3 has pointed out that under Sub Section 2 Clause-F of Section-6 of the Passport Act, the issuance of Passport can be withheld by the Regional Passport Officer, in case of criminal proceedings being pending against the applicant. 5. In the case of the petitioner, only one criminal case as aforesaid, is pending and in paragraph 11 of the writ petition, the petitioner has specifically averred that in the aforesaid case, there is no summon or notice ever served upon the petitioner by the court concerned till today. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents has pointed out the Government of India Notification dated 25.08.1993 and the judgment of this Court in the case of Saleem Khan Vs. Union of India and Another decided on 20.11.2018 in Writ Petition No.31723 (M/B) of 2018. 7. This writ petition is finally disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to approach the Trial Court where the criminal case is pending and seek permission by way of an appropriate application. Only after such permission is granted by the learned Trial Court, the petitioner may approach the Regional Passport Officer, who may pass an appropriate order, in accordance with law, thereafter. September 2, 2025 Shukla WRIC No. 8492 of 2025 2 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench