2026:JHHC:14834 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 3589 of 2026 ------ Dr. Prakash Singh, aged about 72 years, S/o Late Jyotir Bhushan Sinha, R/o Gayatri Niwas Near JIMS Hospital, Karmik Nagar, PO- ISM, PS-Saraidhela, Dist-Dhanbad, Jharkhand. … … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, South Block, PO-Sought, PS-Tilak Nagar, Dist-New Delhi. 2. The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, 3rd Floor, The Galaxia Mall, Ratu Road, PO-Hehal, PS- Sukhdeonagar, Dist-Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. The State of Jharkhand, through the Director General of Police, Police Headquarters, PO & PS-Dhurwa, Dist-Ranchi, Jharkhand. 4. The Officer-In-Charge, Saraidhela Police Station, PO & PS- Saraidhela, Dist-Dhanbad. … … Respondent(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Singh, Advocate Ms. Arpita Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Prashant Pallav, ASGI Ms. Shreya Shukla, AC to ASGI Mr. Gaurav Raj, AC to AAG-II ------ 02/ 14th May, 2026 1. Heard the parties. 2. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the Passport of the petitioner is not being re-issued/renewed, only on the ground that a criminal case is pending against the petitioner. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that right to travel abroad and hold a passport is part of personal liberty, as recognized by the Supreme Court. Mere registration of FIRs or police investigation is not enough to reject renewal of Passport. He also submits that withholding his passport is seriously affecting his profession as he is unable to attend important international medical conferences. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Union of India submits that the petitioner has not furnished the No Objection Certificate from the concerned Court. He submits that once the No Objection Certificate is submitted by the petitioner, the Passport of the petitioner can be renewed/re-issued. 2026:JHHC:14834 2 5. It is admitted that the petitioner is facing criminal cases arising out of allegations of some medical negligence and the petitioner has been named in the FIRs. From perusal of the allegations, it appears that the disputes relate to alleged medical negligence during treatment of patients at the hospital where the petitioner was rendering medical services. Charge-sheet has not yet been filed against the petitioner. 6. Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court finds that prima-facie there are no such serious ground to deny renewal/re- issuance of passport to the petitioner. There is no material indicating that the petitioner has ever attempted to evade investigation, disobey court process, or abscond from justice. Admittedly, the cases against the petitioner arise out of alleged medical negligence and the petitioner is a Doctor by profession. It is also not the case of the respondents that after renewal of Passport, the petitioner is likely to flee away from the country. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, undertakes that the petitioner shall cooperate with the proceedings and shall appear before the concerned Court as and when required. Thus, in the opinion of this Court, prima-facie this is not a case where No Objection Certificate can be refused. 7. The fact, however, remains that as per law the petitioner is required to obtain necessary “No Objection” from the concerned Trial Court. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to approach the concerned Trial Court within one week from today. Upon such application being filed, the concerned Court shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of seven days thereafter and communicate the same to the petitioner. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 14.05.2026 S.K.D/CP-2 Uploaded on 16.05.2026