CWP-2906-2026 -1- 101 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-2906-2026 Date of Decision :09.07.2026 NAVJOT KAUR .....Petitioner VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present : Mr. Simranjit Singh, Advocate with Mr. Aman Mittal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Sharma, Sr. Panel Counsel for the respondents-UOI. KULDEEP TIWARI, J.(Oral) 1. Through the instant petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, a prayer is made for quashing of impugned order dated 21.02.2025 (Annexure P-6), passed by the Regional Passport Office, Chandigarh (respondent no.4), wherethrough, in terms of Schedule I of the Passport Rules, 2000 read with Section 2(c) of the Passport Act, 1967, the passport of the petitioner has been impounded, under the Provisions of Section 10(3)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967. The petitioner further challenges the order dated 18.04.2025 (Annexure P-7), passed by the Appellate Authority, wherethrough, the statutory appeal preferred by the petitioner, has also been dismissed. DHARAM VIR 2026.07.13 13:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-2906-2026 -2- 2. In an attempt to challenge the legality of the order (supra), learned counsel for the petitioner raises only one contention, to the effect that the alleged tampering in the passport was carried out by a foreign travel agent and the petitioner had no role to play in the same. It is further submitted that the petitioner became aware of the said tampering only upon her arrival in India. 3. No other argument was raised. 4. In the instant matter, an adverse input regarding tampering of petitioner's passport booklet was received from Chennai International Airport, whereupon the Regional Passport Office issued a show cause notice dated 07.02.2025 seeking her explanation. In response, the petitioner admitted that the original pages of the passport had been forged, but attributed the said tampering to a foreign travel agent. The authority concerned did not find the explanation to be convincing, as it was vague and unsubstantiated by any material. Consequently, in exercise of the powers vested under the provisions of the Passport Act and the rules framed thereunder, the Regional Passport Office impounded the passport of the petitioner, vide the impugned order dated 21.02.2025 (Annexure P-6). The statutory appeal preferred against the impugned order was dismissed vide order dated 18.04.2025. 5. This Court finds that the sole contention raised on behalf of the petitioner is not sufficient requiring interference with the well- reasoned orders passed by the authority concerned. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to point out any illegality, perversity, DHARAM VIR 2026.07.13 13:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-2906-2026 -3- or error in the impugned orders, so as to justify invocation of the writ jurisdiction of this Court. 6. Furthermore, the impugned order dated 21.02.2025, was passed after due compliance with the principles of natural justice. The explanation furnished by the petitioner, attributing the alleged tampering to the foreign travel agent, remained vague, unsubstantiated, and unsupported by any cogent material. In these circumstances, this Court finds no reason to take a view different from that has already been taken by the authority concerned. 7. Accordingly, the instant petition, is hereby, dismissed. 8. All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (KULDEEP TIWARI) July 09, 2026 JUDGE dharamvir Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No DHARAM VIR 2026.07.13 13:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document