Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 33969 (ALL)

DINESH KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

WRIC/8992/2025 · 2025-04-02

Ashwani Kumar Mishra, Donadi Ramesh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:46400-DB Court No. - 29 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8992 of 2025 Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Respondent :- Union Of India And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Gopal Khare Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I. Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J. Petitioner's application for issuance of passport has been kept pending on account of pendency of Case Crime No.204 of 2022, under Sections 323, 354, 504, 506, 427 IPC, Police Station-Delhi Gate, District- Aligarh and Case Crime No.218 of 2021 under Sections 3 and 4 of Public Gambling Act, Police Station-Gandhi Park, District-Aligarh. Show-cause notice has been issued to the petitioner on 17th February, 2025, by the passport authorities intimating him with regard to his implication in the aforesaid case. Petitioner states that a reply to the show-cause notice has been given, but the claim of the petitioner has not been considered. Thus aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court. Sections 6(2)(e) and 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act, 1967 reads as under:- "6(2) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the passport authority shall refuse to issue a passport or travel document for visiting any foreign country under clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section 5 on any one or more of the following grounds, and on no other ground, namely:? (e) that the applicant has, at any time during the period of five years immediately preceding the date of his application, been convicted by a court in India for any offence involving moral turpitude and sentenced in respect thereof to imprisonment for not less than two years; (f) that proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant are pending before a criminal court in India;" Section 6(2)(e) and 6(2)(f) will have to be read conjointly in order to understand the statutory scheme itself. Although, Section 6(2)(f) provides that in a case where criminal proceedings are pending, the authorities would be entitled not to issue a passport, but this provision has to be read in conjunction with Section 6(2)(e), which clearly exhibits the statutory intent that only in case where a person has been convicted for any offence involving moral turpitude and sentenced for not less than two years during the last five years that such passport can be withheld. The pendency of criminal proceedings, therefore, will have to be examined in light of section 6(2)(e) and in cases other than those covered by Section 6(2)(e), it would not be prudent for the passport authorities to withhold the issuance of passport. It is stated that in this particular case, the offences attributed to the petitioner are not in respect of the moral turpitude and otherwise the maximum sentence, which could be awarded is for a term below two years. Once that be so, we fail to understand as to how the pendency of criminal proceedings would constitute any basis for the authorities not to consider the application for issuance of passport. It is only in a case where where the conviction if for a term of more than two years involving a case of moral turpitude during the last five years that the question would arise for applicability of Section 6(2)(e) of the Passport Act, 1967. It is admitted to learned counsel for the respondents that the sections in which the petitioner is charged the maximum sentence is below two years. Once that be so, none of the exigencies are attracted so as to invoke the provisions of Section 6(2)(e) of the Passport Act, 1967. In the facts of the case, we permit the petitioner to respond to the show cause notice by specifying the facts, as are placed before us, and it goes without saying that the Regional Passport Officer shall accord consideration to such reply of the petitioner, keeping in view Section 6(2)(e) of the Passport Act, 1967, by passing an appropriate reasoned order, within a period of four weeks of such application. With the above observation/direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 3.4.2025 LN Tripathi Digitally signed by :- LALIT TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad