Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 76853 (ALL)

DIWAKAR v. UNION OF INDIA AND 4 OTHERS

WRIC/23443/2025 · 2025-07-21

Manoj Kumar Gupta, Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:119187-DB Court No. - 21 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 23443 of 2025 Petitioner :- Diwakar Respondent :- Union Of India And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akhilesh Kumar Yadav,Priyavrat Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,C.S.C. Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J. 1. On oral prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, he is permitted to correct prayer clause. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vikram Kumar holding brief of Sri Jitendra Kumar, learned counsel for respondents. 3. The following prayer has been made in the present petition:- "To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, to declare the action of the respondent no.3 in refusing passport service to the petitioner on account of N.C.R. No. 08 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504 of I.P.C. Police Station Khetasarai, District Jaunpur and N.C.R. No. 11 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504 of I.P.C. Police Station Khetasarai District Jaunpur as illegal, high handed and arbitrary apart from being in violation of the right of the petitioner under Article-14, 19 & 21 of the constitution of India and direct the respondent no.3 to issue the passport to the petitioner on Application Reference No. LK4065184784225 in fresh category." 4. The case of the petitioner is that the Passport Authority is not issuing passport to the petitioner on account of pendency of 02 NCRs against him. It is urged that the same is not an impediment in issuing passport to the petitioner. 5. He places reliance of paragraph-21 of the judgement in Pawan Kumar Rajbhar vs. Union of India and 2 others in Writ-C No. 41540 of 2023, which is as follows:- "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." 6. Learned counsel appearing for Union of India does not dispute that in the aforesaid judgement, a Co-ordinate Bench, after considering provisions of Passport Act, has held that mere lodging of NCR against a person is not an impediment in issuing passport to him. 7. In view of the above, we dispose of the instant writ petition with direction to respondent No.3 to consider the application by the petitioner for grant of passport within four weeks from the date of communication of the instant order on its own merits without treating the NCRs to be an impediment. . (R.M.N. Mishra, J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.) Order Date :- 22.7.2025 Dhirendra/ Digitally signed by :- DHIRENDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad