IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 118 PRITPAL SINGH DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT CORAM: Present: MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. 1. passed by learned Special Judge, PMLA, SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab in case No.CRM/968/2024, renewal of his passport for a period of 10 years was dismissed as not maintainable. 2. engaged in the in the past, travelled abroad or violation of travel now being unjustifiably deprived of his right to international travel solely on account of proceedin 2002 (PMLA) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRR-1002 Date of decision: SINGH Versus DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Mr. Manoj K. Srivastava, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Sr. Advocate (ASG) (through VC) with Mr. Shobhit Phutela, Advocate and Mr. Vineet Mishra, Advocate for the respondent-ED. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. The petitioner is assailing the order dated 06.02.2025 (A/1) learned Special Judge, PMLA, SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab in case No.CRM/968/2024, whereby the application filed by renewal of his passport for a period of 10 years was dismissed as not maintainable. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner engaged in the Education and Immigration Sector for over 17 years, and has, the past, travelled abroad on 20 occasions without any instance of misuse of travel-related conditions. It is contended that the petitioner is unjustifiably deprived of his right to international travel solely on account of proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), which themselves rest on a legally IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1002-2025 Date of decision: July 09, 2025 ...Petitioner ...Respondent HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL , Advocate (through VC) Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Sr. Advocate (ASG) (through VC) with Mr. Shobhit Phutela, Advocate and The petitioner is assailing the order dated 06.02.2025 (A/1) learned Special Judge, PMLA, SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab in case whereby the application filed by the petitioner seeking renewal of his passport for a period of 10 years was dismissed as not Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is Education and Immigration Sector for over 17 years, and has, on 20 occasions without any instance of misuse . It is contended that the petitioner is unjustifiably deprived of his right to international travel solely on Prevention of Money Laundering Act, , which themselves rest on a legally tenuous foundation. ...Petitioner ...Respondent The petitioner is assailing the order dated 06.02.2025 (A/1) learned Special Judge, PMLA, SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab in case the petitioner seeking renewal of his passport for a period of 10 years was dismissed as not is Education and Immigration Sector for over 17 years, and has, on 20 occasions without any instance of misuse . It is contended that the petitioner is unjustifiably deprived of his right to international travel solely on Prevention of Money Laundering Act, Jaspreet Kaur 2025.07.10 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRR-1002-2025 3. find mention in the chargesheet of the predicate No.118/2017 column No.2. The core allegations in the predicate offence and no application for has been moved by the is submitted that the pending proceedings under the on the aforesaid FIR, are inherently unsustainable 4. renewal of passport had been allowed on of 1 year, owing to an inadvertent omission on the part of the petitioner in not specifying the desir moved to seek renewal for the full statuto necessitated by the professional commitments of the petitioner familial obligations abroad. Denial of such renewal, it is submitted, disproportionately affects the livelihood under Article 21 of the Constitution of India 5. appeared on behalf of the respondent prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite. It has been contended that the impugned order suffers from no infirmity. It has still further been argued that the learned as not maintainable, considering that the earlier application adjudicated on merits on 2025 It has been further urged that the name of the petitioner find mention in the chargesheet of the predicate No.118/2017, and that after due investigation, column No.2. The core allegations in the predicate offence application for further investigation or has been moved by the investigating agency in that case. In this backdrop, it is submitted that the pending proceedings under the on the aforesaid FIR, are inherently unsustainable Learned counsel further contends that renewal of passport had been allowed on 10.12.2024, owing to an inadvertent omission on the part of the petitioner in not specifying the desired duration. The present application, it is urged, moved to seek renewal for the full statutory period of 10 years, which is necessitated by the professional commitments of the petitioner obligations abroad. Denial of such renewal, it is submitted, disproportionately affects the fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India On being put to notice, Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Sr. Advo appeared on behalf of the respondent-ED and has vehemently opposed the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite. It has been contended that the impugned order suffers from no infirmity. It has still further been argued that the learned trial Court rightly dismissed the second application as not maintainable, considering that the earlier application adjudicated on merits on 10.12.2024. The renewed request, arising from the -2- It has been further urged that the name of the petitioner does not find mention in the chargesheet of the predicate offence registered as FIR , and that after due investigation, the petitioner was placed in column No.2. The core allegations in the predicate offence were dropped, further investigation or summoning of the petitioner investigating agency in that case. In this backdrop, it is submitted that the pending proceedings under the PMLA, being predicated on the aforesaid FIR, are inherently unsustainable in law. Learned counsel further contends that an earlier application for 10.12.2024, albeit only for a period owing to an inadvertent omission on the part of the petitioner in ed duration. The present application, it is urged, was ry period of 10 years, which is necessitated by the professional commitments of the petitioner and urgent obligations abroad. Denial of such renewal, it is submitted, right of the petitioner to life and under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. On being put to notice, Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Sr. Advocate has ED and has vehemently opposed the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite. It has been contended that the impugned order suffers from no infirmity. It has still further been trial Court rightly dismissed the second application as not maintainable, considering that the earlier application had already been The renewed request, arising from the does not d as FIR the petitioner was placed in were dropped, petitioner investigating agency in that case. In this backdrop, it PMLA, being predicated an earlier application for only for a period owing to an inadvertent omission on the part of the petitioner in was ry period of 10 years, which is and urgent obligations abroad. Denial of such renewal, it is submitted, to life and cate has ED and has vehemently opposed the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite. It has been contended that the impugned order suffers from no infirmity. It has still further been trial Court rightly dismissed the second application had already been Jaspreet Kaur 2025.07.10 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRR-1002-2025 same cause, could not have been entertained afresh merely because the petitioner subs 6. still further submitted that under the PMLA, and in view of the statutory framework Notification No.GSR for long-term renewal of passport was rightly declined. Learned counsel submits that proceedings cannot be the basis for seeking when the proceedings are 7. petitioner has candidly admitted that the earlier application 10.12.2024, did not specify the 8. relevant material placed on record. 9. passport moved by the petitioner was allowed by the learned trial Court on 10.12.2024, pursuant to which the passport was renewed for a period of one year. Admittedly, for 10-year renewal. The present petition, seeking modification/extension of the said relief on grounds now stated to be previously dismissed on the ground of maintainability. 10. faulted in law 2025 cause, could not have been entertained afresh merely because the subsequently realized the omission in his prior application. Learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the ED has still further submitted that the petitioner is facing a under the PMLA, and in view of the statutory framework Notification No.GSR 570(E) issued by the Central Government, term renewal of passport was rightly declined. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner’s claim of legal unsustainability of PMLA proceedings cannot be the basis for seeking renewal of when the proceedings are subjudice and governed by statutory safeguards. On a pointed query put by the Court, petitioner has candidly admitted that the earlier application , did not specify the desirability of a 10 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material placed on record. It is not in dispute that the earlier application passport moved by the petitioner was allowed by the learned trial Court on 10.12.2024, pursuant to which the passport was renewed for a period of one year. Admittedly, the said application did not mention any specific request year renewal. The present petition, seeking modification/extension of the said relief on grounds now stated to be previously dismissed on the ground of maintainability. The learned trial Court, in the opinion of this Court, law for holding that the second -3- cause, could not have been entertained afresh merely because the equently realized the omission in his prior application. counsel appearing on behalf of the ED has the petitioner is facing a pending prosecution under the PMLA, and in view of the statutory framework, including Gazette 570(E) issued by the Central Government, the prayer term renewal of passport was rightly declined. Learned counsel petitioner’s claim of legal unsustainability of PMLA renewal of passport, particularly and governed by statutory safeguards. put by the Court, learned counsel for the petitioner has candidly admitted that the earlier application, allowed on desirability of a 10-year renewal. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the It is not in dispute that the earlier application for renewal of passport moved by the petitioner was allowed by the learned trial Court on 10.12.2024, pursuant to which the passport was renewed for a period of one n did not mention any specific request year renewal. The present petition, seeking modification/extension of the said relief on grounds now stated to be previously omitted, came to be al Court, in the opinion of this Court, cannot be second application, filed for the same cause, could not have been entertained afresh merely because the counsel appearing on behalf of the ED has pending prosecution , including Gazette the prayer term renewal of passport was rightly declined. Learned counsel petitioner’s claim of legal unsustainability of PMLA particularly unsel for the allowed on I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the for renewal of passport moved by the petitioner was allowed by the learned trial Court on 10.12.2024, pursuant to which the passport was renewed for a period of one n did not mention any specific request year renewal. The present petition, seeking modification/extension of omitted, came to be cannot be application, filed for the same Jaspreet Kaur 2025.07.10 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRR-1002-2025 subject matter, was not already adjudicated and acted upon. seek full relief in the first instance but failed to do so applications of this nature would not only undermine judicial finality but also amount to seeking a review of application, which is impermissible in law before the same forum. 11. dispute the factual premise forming the basis of the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court. This Court finds no legal in the said order warranting interference in 12. July 09, 2025 Jaspreet Kaur 2025 subject matter, was not maintainable once the earlier application adjudicated and acted upon. The petitioner had the opportunity to seek full relief in the first instance but failed to do so applications of this nature would not only undermine judicial finality but also amount to seeking a review of an earlier order in the guise application, which is impermissible in law before the same forum. The grounds urged in the present revision petition do not dispute the factual premise forming the basis of the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court. This Court finds no legal in the said order warranting interference in revisional jurisdiction. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed July 09, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable -4- maintainable once the earlier application had been The petitioner had the opportunity to seek full relief in the first instance but failed to do so. Allowing successive applications of this nature would not only undermine judicial finality but an earlier order in the guise of a fresh application, which is impermissible in law before the same forum. The grounds urged in the present revision petition do not dispute the factual premise forming the basis of the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court. This Court finds no legal or procedural infirmity revisional jurisdiction. he petition stands dismissed. (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No had been The petitioner had the opportunity to successive applications of this nature would not only undermine judicial finality but of a fresh The grounds urged in the present revision petition do not dispute the factual premise forming the basis of the impugned order passed or procedural infirmity Jaspreet Kaur 2025.07.10 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh