ABHISHEK TIWARI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was granted passport by respondents No.1 & 2 being Passport No.G 7856010 under the provisions of the Passports Act, 1967, the validity of which expired on 24-3-2018. He filed application for renewal of passport but in that renewal application, police verification was sought in which it was revealed that some criminal case / trial is pending against him in the jurisdictional criminal Court and thereby respondents No.1 and 2 sought clarification / explanation from him, as he is suffering trial for offence punishable under Sections 294, 323, 451 and 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC. Immediately thereafter, the petitioner filed an application under Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967 before the trial Magistrate where his criminal trial is pending, for necessary orders directing renewal of passport which has been rejected by the impugned order holding that the order seeking explanation is appealable against which this writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner herein.

(2.) Ms. Anmol Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would submit that the trial Court is absolutely unjustified in rejecting the application holding it to be appealable ignoring the notification dated 25th August, 1993 issued by the Central Government by which subject to no objection from the criminal court, passport can be renewed pending trial of criminal case, as such, the impugned order deserves to be set-aside and the matter be remitted to the jurisdictional criminal Court for considering the case of the petitioner for granting him permission to depart from India, from the operation of the provisions of clause (f) of sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Passports Act, 1967.

(3.) Mr. P. Chetan Kumar, Advocate, appearing on behalf of Mr. B. Gopa Kumar, Assistant Solicitor General of India, for the Union of India / respondents No.1 & 2, would submit that if the jurisdictional criminal Court permits the petitioner in accordance with the notification dated 25th of August, 1993, it can be remitted to that Court for consideration.