HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 35330 of 2026 Court No. - 79 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard Sri Ashutosh Kumar Shukla, Advocate holding brief of Sri Akash Kumar Nishad, learned counsel for applicant and Sri Shishir Prakash Singh, learned ASGI assisted by Ms. Annapurna Singh Chandel along with Sri Kuldeep Singh Chauhan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Union of India. 2. By means of the instant application filed under Section 528 BNSS, the applicant has sought direction in favour of opposite party nos.3 and 4 to issue new/fresh passport in favour of applicant. 3. At the very outset, a precise query has been made before learned counsel for applicant that whether his any application seeking the same prayer as sought through the instant application, has ever been rejected by learned court concerned, in response to the same, he submitted that there is hardly any denial of learned court concerned in writing but at the same time, sought attention of the Court over order dated 10.10.2025 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Rahimuddin Vs. Union of India and another (Writ C No.34412 of 2025). 4. The ratio of the said judgment specifically provides an opportunity for seeking/extending passport in favour of a person against whom a criminal trial is pending, the application for seeking extension/renewal or issuance of passport shall lie before the same court where proceedings of trial has been stayed. 5. Learned counsel for applicant informed that interim protection has already Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akash Kumar Nishad, Subhash Chandra Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : A.S.G.I., Annapurna Singh, G.A. Rakesh Kumar .....Applicant(s) Union Of India And 4 Others .....Opposite Party(s) been extended in favour of applicant vide order dated 17.07.2025 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Application U/S 528 BNSS No.22997 of 2025 (Mamta Devi and others Vs. State of U.P. and another). 6. Ms. Annapurna Singh Chandel, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Union of India vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant application and argued that the instant application is not maintainable on the ground that interim protection has already been extended in favour of applicant vide order dated 17.07.2025 passed in Application U/S 528 BNSS No.22997 of 2025, therefore all the ancillary proceedings or application for seeking NOC, lies before the same Court where the said application is pending in pursuance of judgment passed in Rahimuddin (supra). 7. On due consideration to the arguments advanced alongwith perusal of the records, it is evident that interim protection has already been extended in favour of applicant vide order dated 17.07.2025 passed in Application U/S 528 BNSS No.22997 of 2025, therefore the arguments raised by learned counsel appearing on behalf of Union of India is quite justified that application for seeking extension/renewal or issuance of passport, be preferred in the same proceedings wherein interim protection has already been extended in favour of applicant. 8. In view of the above discussions, the instant application is hereby disposed of with liberty to applicant to prefer fresh application, if advised, for any cause of action arising out of renewal/extension/issuance of passport before the Court where Application U/S 528 BNSS No.22997 of 2025 is pending in light of judgment passed in Rahimuddin (supra). September 8, 2026 Vivek Kr. NA528 No. 35330 of 2026 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad