1 CGHC010270602026 2026:CGHC:34042 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3907 of 2026 1 - Abhishek Goyal S/o Shiv Kumar Goyal Aged About 37 Years Proprietor Of Jd Sparth Pvt. Ltd., R/o House No. 101, West End Society, Nehru Nagar, Supela, Bhilai, District- Durg (C.G.). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of External Affairs, New Delhi. 2 - Regional Passport Officer Regional Passport Office, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.). 4 - Superintendent Of Police District Durg (C.G.). 5 - Station House Officer Police Station Pulgaon, District Durg (C.G.). ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent(s) No. 1 & 2 : Mr. Ramakant Mishra, DSGI and Mr. T. S. Sahu, CGC. For Respondent/State : Mr. Anmol Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 05/08/2026 RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the communication dated 03.02.2026 whereby the petitioner's passport application has been closed. 10.2. Direct the respondents to process and issue a passport in favour of the petitioner in accordance with law, notwithstanding the pendency of Criminal Case arising out of Crime No.184/2024, there being no judicial order restraining issuance of the passport. 10.3. Pass any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had applied for renewal of his passport; however, without assigning any cogent reason, the said application has been closed by the respondent authorities vide communication dated 03.02.2026. It is contended that the impugned communication neither discloses any 3 valid justification for closing the petitioner's application nor affords him an adequate opportunity to rectify any alleged deficiency, thereby causing serious prejudice to the petitioner. 3. Upon a specific query put by this Court, learned counsel appearing for Respondents No. 1 and 2 submits that the communication dated 03.02.2026 itself clearly mentions that the petitioner is at liberty to submit a fresh application for issuance of a passport along with all the requisite documents. It is further submitted that if such a fresh application is submitted in accordance with the prescribed procedure, the same shall be processed and considered by the competent authority strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Passports Act, 1967 and the Rules framed thereunder. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be satisfied if he is granted liberty to submit a fresh application for issuance of a passport in accordance with law. 5. In view of the aforesaid submission, the petitioner is granted liberty to file a fresh application before the 4 competent passport authority along with all requisite documents. In the event such an application is submitted, the concerned respondent authorities shall consider and decide the same expeditiously, strictly in accordance with law, by passing an appropriate reasoned order, without being influenced by the closure of the earlier application, provided there exists no other legal impediment. 6. With this observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat