Issuance Or Renewal Of Passport Can Be Barred Only After Presenting Of Chargesheet In Criminal Cases: J&K High Cour

Post By 24law
February 20, 2025

Pranav B Prem

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court has held that the mere registration of an FIR or a pending investigation cannot be a ground for denying the issuance or renewal of a passport. The court ruled that unless a charge sheet has been presented before a competent court, the authorities cannot refuse to issue or renew a passport.

Case Background

The judgment was delivered by Justice Javed Iqbal Wani. The petitioner, a retired public servant who had served as Deputy General Manager at J&K Projects Construction Corporation, had applied for the renewal of his passport. His application was rejected due to the pendency of an FIR registered against him under Sections 468, 471, and 120-B IPC, along with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. However, no charge sheet had been filed in the case. The petitioner challenged the denial of his passport renewal, arguing that it was illegal and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. He relied on the precedent set in Rajesh Gupta v. Union of India & Anr. (2022), where the court had ruled that the mere registration of an FIR or an ongoing investigation is not a valid ground to refuse passport issuance or renewal.

Court’s Observations and Ruling

The court referred to the Supreme Court’s rulings in Satwant Singh Sawhney v. D. Ramarathnam (AIR 1967 SC 1836) and Menaka Gandhi v. Union of India (AIR 1978 SC 597), affirming that the right to travel abroad is a facet of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. Any restriction on this right must be authorized by law. Quoting from the judgment, the court reiterated: "Mere registration of an FIR or pendency of investigation by the investigating agency is no ground to refuse issue or renewal of passport requested by the applicant. At this stage, when FIR alone is registered and investigation is undertaken by the Investigating Agency, there are no proceedings before a criminal Court. The criminal proceedings commence before the competent Court of criminal jurisdiction only when a final report is laid by the investigating agency before the Court or in case of a private complaint, when the criminal Court of competent jurisdiction takes cognizance and proceeds in the manner provided under the Code of Criminal Procedure." The court emphasized that criminal proceedings can only be considered pending if a charge sheet has been filed in court or if a magistrate has taken cognizance of a private complaint.

Reliance on Precedents and Legal Provisions

The court also referred to Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act, 1967, which states that passport renewal can be denied if "proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant are pending before a criminal court in India." The court noted that mere FIR registration does not constitute "pending proceedings" before a criminal court. The judgment also cited Venkatesh Kandasamy v. Government of India, Ministry of External Affairs (2015), where the Madras High Court held that no criminal proceedings can be said to be pending unless the court has taken cognizance of the offence.

Court’s Directions

In light of these observations, the High Court directed: "Accordingly, for the aforesaid reasons, the instant petition deserves to be allowed and same accordingly is allowed with a direction to the respondents 1 and 4 to accord consideration to the case of the petitioner for grant of passport/travel document, notwithstanding the alleged involvement of the petitioner in FIR Nos. 41/2020 and 02/2020 and the no clearness granted by respondents 2, 3 and 5 in this regard. However, before according such consideration respondent 4 shall re-verify as to whether a final report/charge sheet has been laid in the FIRs’ in question in which the petitioner is alleged to be involved before any competent court of law." The court granted four weeks for compliance with the order.