As per case facts, the Petitioner, SURUMI SHIJI, an accused in a criminal case (Crime No.33/2024), sought the release of her seized passport and mobile phone. Her application was dismissed ...
No Acts & Articles mentioned in this case
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31
ST
DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 180 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
SMT. SURUMI SHIJI
W/O SHIJI VALIAYAKATH BEERAN
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
R/AT ENGANDIYOOOR, COCHIN
KERALA - 680 567.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI R.SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
CITY CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH (WEST)
BENGALURU.
REPRESENTED BY HCGP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU.
2. SMT. ASHWINI RAI
D/O CHITTARANJAN RAI
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
OFFICE AT: M/S LAPTECH TRADERS
FZC COMPANY, NO.203
2
ND
FLOOR, SHA SULTAN COMPLEX
VASANTHNAGAR, BENGALURU.
3. REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
8
TH
BLOCK, 80 FEET ROAD
KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU
REPRESENTED BY ITS
AUTHORISED OFFICER.
CAUSE TITLE AMENDED AS PER THE ORDER DATED
27.01.2026.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN, DSGI FOR R3;
SRI K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP FOR R1)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C., (FILED U/S 52 8
BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
10.10.2025 PASSED BY THE I ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE IN C.C.NO.23988/2025 AND ORDER DATED
16.12.2025 PASSED BY THE COURT OF LII ADDL. CITY CI VIL
AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU IN CRL.R.P.NO.534/202 5
ON AN APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER
SECTION 451 AND 457 OF CR.P.C FOR THE RELEASE OF
PASSPORT (U6761184) AND THE MOBILE PHONE (SAMSUG
GELAXY S 23 ULTRA) SEIZED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE IN
PF NO.24/25 AND 23/25 RESPECTIVELY, WHICH IS PRODUC ED
AT ANNEXURE-A AND B RESPECTIVELY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an
order dated 10.10.2025, passed by the I Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, dismissing the application filed by the
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
petitioner under Sections 451 and 457 of the Cr.P.C. seeking a
direction to release the passport and mobile phone seized in
P.F.Nos.24/2025 and 23/2025 respectively, by the re spondent
– police in C.C.No.23988/2025 and confirmation orde r dated
16.12.2025, passed by the LII Additional City Civil and Sessions
Judge, Bengaluru, in Crl.R.P.No.534/2025.
2. Heard Sri R. Shashidhara, learned counsel for
petitioner, Sri K. Nageshwarappa, learned High Cour t
Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri H. S hanthi
Bhushan, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India for
respondent No.3.
3. The petitioner is an accused in Crime No.33/2024 ,
registered for the offences under Section 120B, 420 and 468 of
the IPC. The police after investigation file their charge sheet in
C.C.No.23988/2025, for the aforesaid offences. The issue is
not with the merit of the matter. What has driven the
petitioner to this Court in the subject petition is rejection of his
application filed under Sections 451 and 457 of the Cr.P.C.
seeking release of his passport and mobile phone, on the score
that the petitioner is involved a crime.
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a
direction be issued to respondent No.1 to release the passport
and the mobile as the petitioner is wanting to travel abroad and
allow the application preferred by the petitioner before the
concerned Court.
5. Learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for
respondent No.3 submits that under Section 6(2)(f) of the
Indian Passport Act would straight away come in the way of
issuance of normal validity passport. He would submit that the
petitioner be directed to approach the Passport Aut horities
seeking his prayer for short validity passport and places
reliance upon the order passed by this Court in
W.P.No.28203/2023, disposed on 09.01.2024.
6. This Court in W.P.No.28203/2023, has passed the
following order:
“9. The issue did not detain this Court for long or delve
deep into matter as this Court while answering an
identical circumstance in W.P.No.24269/2023 disposed of
on 04.12.2023 has held as under:
“7. I have given my anxious consideration to the
submissions made by the respective learned counsel and
have perused the material on record. In furtherance
thereof, the issue that falls for my consideration is:
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
“Whether pendency of a criminal case
would bar issuance or renewal/re-issuance of a
passport to a citizen of this nation?”
8. To consider the aforesaid issue, it would become
necessary to notice certain provisions of the Passports Act,
1967 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short). The
relevant provisions that are germane to be noticed are
Sections 2(e), 3, 5, 6, 7, 10 and 22 of the Act and they
read as follows:
“2. Definitions.—In this Act, unless the context
otherwise requires,—
… … …
(e) “travel document” means a travel document
issued or deemed to have been issued under this
Act.
3. Passport or travel document for departure
from India.—No person shall depart from, or attempt to
depart from, India unless he holds in this behalf a valid
passport or travel document.
Explanation.—For the purposes of this section,—
(a) “passport” includes a passport which having
been issued by or under the authority of the
Government of a foreign country satisfies the
conditions prescribed under the Passport
(Entry into India) Act, 1920 (34 of 1920), in
respect of the class of passports to which it
belongs;
(b) “travel document” includes a travel document
which having been issued by or under the authority
of the Government of a foreign country satisfies the
conditions prescribed.
… … …
5. Applications for passports, travel documents,
etc., and orders thereon.—(1) An application for the issue
of a passport under this Act for visiting such foreign country
or countries (not being a named foreign country) as may be
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
specified in the application may be made to the pas sport
authority and shall be accompanied bysuch fee as ma y be
prescribed to meet the expenses incurred on special security
paper, printing, lamination and other connected
miscellaneous services in issuing passports and other travel
documents.
Explanation.—In this section, ‘named foreign country’
means such foreign country as the Central Governmen t may,
by rules made under this Act, specify in this behalf.
(1-A) An application for the issue of—
(i) a passport under this Act for visiting a named foreign
country; or
(ii) a travel document under this Act, for visiting such
foreign country or countries (including a named
foreign country) as may be specified in the
application or for an endorsement on the passport or
travel document referred to in this section, may be
made to the passport authority and shall be
accompanied by such fee (if any) not exceeding
rupees fifty, as may be prescribed.
(1-B) Every application under this section shall be in
such form and contain such particulars as may be
prescribed.]
(2) On receipt of an application [under this
section], the passport authority, after making such
inquiry, if any, as it may consider necessary, shal l,
subject to the other provisions of this Act, by ord er in
writing,—
(a) issue the passport or travel document with
endorsement, or, as the case may be, make
on the passport or travel document the
endorsement, in respect of the foreign
country or countries specified in the
application; or
(b) issue the passport or travel document with
endorsement, or, as the case may be, make
on the passport or travel document the
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
endorsement, in respect of one or more of
the foreign countries specified in the
application and refuse to make an
endorsement in respect of the other country
or countries; or
(c) refuse to issue the passport or travel
document or, as case may be, refuse to
make on the passport or travel document
any endorsement.
(3) Where the passport authority makes an order
under clause (b) or clause (c) of sub-section (2) o n the
application of any person, it shall record in writing a brief
statement of its reasons for making such order and furnish to
that person on demand a copy of the same unless in any
case the passport authority is of the opinion that it will not
be in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India,
the security of India, friendly relations of India with any
foreign country or in the interests of the general public to
furnish such copy.
6. Refusal of passports, travel documents, etc .—
(1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the passport
authority shall refuse to make an endorsement for v isiting
any foreign country under clause (b) or clause (c) of sub-
section (2) of Section 5 on any one or more of the following
grounds, and on no other ground, namely:—
(a) that the applicant may, or is likely to, engage in
such country in activities prejudicial to the
sovereignty and integrity of India;
(b) that the presence of the applicant in such country
may, or is likely to, be detrimental to the security
of India;
(c) that the presence of the applicant in such country
may, or is likely to, prejudice the friendly relations
of India with that or any other country;
(d) that in the opinion of the Central Government the
presence of the applicant in such country is not in
the public interest.
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
(2) Subject to the other provisions of this Act,
the passport authority shall refuse to issue a pass port
or travel document for visiting any foreign country
under clause (c) of sub-section (2) of Section 5 on any
one or more of the following grounds, and on no oth er
ground, namely:—
(a) the applicant is not a citizen of India;
(b) that the applicant may, or is likely to, engage outside
India in activities prejudicial to the sovereignty and
integrity of India;
(c) the departure of the applicant from India may, or is
likely to, be detrimental to the security of India;
(d) that the presence of the applicant outside India may,
or is likely to, prejudice the friendly relations of India
with any foreign country;
(e) that the applicant has, at any time during the
period of five years immediately preceding the
date of his application, been convicted by a
court in India for any offence involving moral
turpitude and sentenced in respect thereof to
imprisonment for not less than two years;
(f) that proceedings in respect of an offence
alleged to have been committed by the
applicant are pending before a criminal court in
India;
(g) that a warrant or summons for the appearance, or a
warrant for the arrest, of the applicant has been
issued by a court under any law for the time being in
force or that an order prohibiting the departure from
India of the applicant has been made by any such
court;
(h) that the applicant has been repatriated and has not
reimbursed the expenditure incurred in connection
with such repatriation;
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
(i) that in the opinion of the Central Government the
issue of a passport or travel document to the
applicant will not be in the public interest.
7. Duration of passports and travel documents .—
A passport or travel document shall, unless revoked earlier,
continue in force for such period as may be prescribed and
different periods may be prescribed for different classes of
passports or travel documents or for different categories of
passports or travel documents under each such class:
Provided that a passport or travel document may be
issued for a shorter period than the prescribed period—
(a) if the person by whom it is required so desires;
or
(b) if the passport authority, for reasons to be
communicated in writing to the applicant, considers
in any case that the passport or travel document
should be issued for a shorter period.
… … …
10. Variation, impounding and revocation of
passports and travel documents .—(1) The passport
authority may, having regard to the provisions of sub-section
(1) of Section 6 or any notification under Section 19, vary or
cancel the endorsements on a passport or travel doc ument
or may, with the previous approval of the Central
Government, vary or cancel the conditions (other th an the
prescribed conditions) subject to which a passport or travel
document has been issued and may, for that purpose,
require the holder of a passport or travel document , by
notice in writing, to deliver up the passport or tr avel
document to it within such time as may be specified in the
notice and the holder shall comply with such notice.
(2) The passport authority may, on the application of
the holder of a passport or a travel document, and with the
previous approval of the Central Government also va ry or
cancel the conditions (other than the prescribed conditions)
of the passport or travel document.
(3) The passport authority may impound or cause to
be impounded or revoke a passport or travel document,—
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
(a) if the passport authority is satisfied that the
holder of the passport or travel document is in
wrongful possession thereof;
(b) if the passport or travel document was obtained
by the suppression of material information or on
the basis of wrong information provided by the
holder of the passport or travel document or any
other person on his behalf:
Provided that if the holder of such passport obtains
another passport, the passport authority shall also
impound or cause to be impounded or revoke such
other passport.
(c) if the passport authority deems it necessary so
to do in the interests of the sovereignty and
integrity of India, the security of India, friendly
relations of India with any foreign country, or in
the interests of the general public;
(d) if the holder of the passport or travel document
has, at any time after the issue of the passport or
travel document, been convicted by a court in India
for any offence involving moral turpitude and
sentenced in respect thereof to imprisonment for
not less than two years;
(e) if proceedings in respect of an
offence alleged to have been committed by
the holder of the passport or travel document
are pending before a criminal court in India;
(f) if any of the conditions of the passport or travel
document has been contravened;
(g) if the holder of the passport or travel document
has failed to comply with a notice under sub-
section (1) requiring him to deliver up the same;
(h) if it is brought to the notice of the passport
authority that a warrant or summons for the
appearance, or a warrant for the arrest, of the
holder of the passport or travel document has been
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
issued by a court under any law for the time being
in force or if an order prohibiting the departure
from India of the holder of the passport or other
travel document has been made by any such court
and the passport authority is satisfied that a
warrant or summons has been so issued or an
order has been so made.
(4) The passport authority may also revoke a passport
or travel document on the application of the holder thereof.
(5) Where the passport authority makes an order
varying or cancelling the endorsements on, or varyi ng the
conditions of, a passport or travel document under sub-
section (1) or an order impounding or revoking a passport or
travel document under sub-section (3), it shall rec ord in
writing a brief statement of the reasons for making such
order and furnish to the holder of the passport or travel
document on demand a copy of the same unless in any case,
the passport authority is of the opinion that it will not be in
the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the
security of India, friendly relations of India with any foreign
country or in the interests of the general public to furnish
such a copy.
(6) The authority to whom the passport authority is
subordinate may, by order in writing, impound or cause to be
impounded or revoke a passport or travel document o n any
ground on which it may be impounded or revoked by t he
passport authority and the foregoing provisions of this
section shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the
impounding or revocation of a passport or travel document
by such authority.
(7) A court convicting the holder of a passport or
travel document of any offence under this Act or the rules
made thereunder may also revoke the passport or tra vel
document:
Provided that if the conviction is set aside on appeal or
otherwise the revocation shall become void.
(8) An order of revocation under sub-section (7) may
also be made by an appellate court or by the High C ourt
when exercising its powers of revision.
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
(9) On the revocation of a passport or travel document
under this section the holder thereof shall, without delay
surrender the passport or travel document, if the same has
not already been impounded, to the authority by who m it
has been revoked or to such other authority as may be
specified in this behalf in the order of revocation.
… … …
22. Power to exempt .—Where the Central
Government is of the opinion that it is necessary o r
expedient in the public interest so to do, it may, by
notification in the Official Gazette and subject to such
conditions, if any, as it may specify in the
notification,—
(a) exempt any person or class of persons from
the operation of all or any of the provisions of
this Act or the rules made thereunder; and
(b) as often as may be, cancel any such notification
and again subject, by a like notification, the person
or class of persons to the operation of such
provisions.”
(Emphasis supplied)
Section 2(e) defines a ‘travel document’ which has been
issued or deemed to have been issued under the Act.
Therefore, the passport becomes a travel document f or
departure from India and return. Section 3 depicts what a
passport would be. Section 5 deals with application for
passport and the manner in which the application should be
made before the Passport Authorities. Section 6 forms the
fulcrum of the lis. Section 6(1) directs that subject to other
provisions of the Act the passport authority shall refuse to
make an endorsement for visiting any country under clause
(b) or (c) of sub-section (2) of Section 5 on several grounds
stipulated therein. The grounds are clauses (a) to (d) of
sub-section (1) and clauses (a) to (i) of sub-section (2) of
Section 6. Section 7 deals with duration of passpo rt and
travel documents. A passport or a travel document u nless
revoked continues to be in force for such period as may be
prescribed in the said travel document of each clas s of
passport. Section 10 deals with variation, impounding and
revocation of passport and travel documents. Sectio n 22
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
empowers the Central Government to exempt any perso n or
class of persons from operation of all or any of the provisions
of the Act by issuance of a notification.
9. In furtherance of Section 22, Government of India
in the Ministry of External Affairs, has issued a notification on
25-08-1993 in G.S.R.570(E) (for short ‘GSR 570
Notification’). GSR 570 notification deals with a situation of
the kind that is projected in the case at hand. Therefore, I
deem it appropriate to notice the notification insofar as it is
germane. It reads as follows:
“The Notification dated 25.08.1993 reads as under:
“MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
NOTIFICATION
New Delhi, the 25
th
August, 1993
G.S.R. 570(E).-In exercise of the powers conferred by
clause (a) of Section 22 of the Passports Act, 1967 (15 of
1967) and in supersession of the notification of th e
Government of India in the Ministry of External Affairs No.
G.S.R. 298(E), dated the 14
th
April, 1976, the Central
Government, being of the opinion that it is necessary in
public interest to do so, hereby exempts citizens o f
India against whom proceedings in respect of an
offence alleged to have been committed by them are
pending before a criminal court in India and who
produce orders from the court concerned permitting
them to depart from India, from the operation of th e
provisions of Clause (f) of sub-section (2) of Sect ion 6
of the said Act, subject to the following condition s,
namely:—
(a) the passport to be issued to every such citizen
shall be issued—
(i) for the period specified in order of the court
referred to above, if the court specifies a period for which the
passport has to be issued; or
(ii) if no period either for the issue of the passport or
for the travel abroad is specified in such order, the passport
shall be issued for a period one year;
- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
(iii) if such order gives permission to travel
abroad for a period less than one year, but does no t
specify the period validity of the passport, the
passport shall be issued for one year; or
(iv) if such order gives permission to travel
abroad for a period exceeding one year, and does no t
specify the validity of the passport, then the pass port
shall be issued for the period of travel abroad spe cified
in the order.
(b) any passport issued in terms of (a) (ii) and (a) (iii)
above can be further renewed for one year at a time ,
provided the applicant has not travelled abroad for the
period sanctioned by the court; and provided further that, in
the meantime, the order of the court is not cancell ed or
modified;
(c) any passport issued in terms of (a) (i) above
can be further renewed only on the basis of a fresh
court order specifying a further period of validity of
the passport or specifying a period for travel abro ad;
(d) the said citizen shall give an undertaking in writing
to the passport issuing authority that he shall, if required by
the court concerned, appear before it at any time during the
continuance in force of the passport so issued.”
(Emphasis supplied)
GSR 570 deals with a situation of the kind in the c ase at
hand. It permits issuance of short validity passport pursuant
to the orders that would be passed by the concerned Court
according to the specified period and if no period is specified,
the passport would be issued for a period of one ye ar.
Therefore, it is for the applicant against whom criminal case
is pending, in any Court of law in the country, to approach
the concerned Court before which the proceeding is pending,
and seek for permission to travel; if such permissi on is
granted, it will have to be in tune with the conditions in GSR
570 (supra).
10. Section 24 of the Act empowers the Central
Government to make Rules for carrying out the purpo ses of
the Act. Rules are promulgated in the year 1980 i.e ., the
- 15 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
passports Rules, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’
for short). Rule 5 deals with form of applications for issue of
passport, renewal or re-issuance thereof. The form is found
in Schedule-III.
11. The aforementioned form is the broad statutory
framework for issuance, re-issuance, variation, cancellation,
impounding of passport as also, the form in which t he
application for issuance or re-issuance is to be made.
APPLICABILITY OF THE ACT TO THE SUBJECT FACTS:
12. The petitioner is issued passport on 11-04-201 4. Its
validity is up to 10-04-2024. In the interregnum, the
petitioner gets embroiled in a crime. The substance of the
crime is mother of the petitioner commits suicide. Initially
an unnatural death report was prepared by the Polic e but
later when the investigation was directed to be taken up, the
petitioner, his father and his wife were all arrayed as accused
1, 2 and 3. The offences were the ones punishable under
Sections 302, 201, 120-B, 182 r/w 34 of the IPC. The case
was committed to the Court of Sessions and presentl y
pending trial in S.C.No.28 of 2017. Therefore, it is a case
where the petitioner is one of the accused in an of fence
which can even result in capital punishment. The trial is in
progress. The petitioner is not absolved of the crime, by any
competent Court of law even to this date. It is an altogether
different circumstance that the petitioner has been permitted
to travel, by the Court of Sessions, intermittently for his
work. That is not the issue in the case at hand. The issue is
validity of the passport of the petitioner or the passport
having less than six months to expire which makes t he
petitioner ineligible for issuance of visa and travel. Therefore,
it is germane to notice whether such ineligibility has a
statutory foundation. It therefore becomes germane to
notice the acknowledgment of denial issued by the 2
nd
respondent. It reads as follows:
“Acknowledgement Letter
REISSUE PASSPORT-Normal File No.:BN2075801459323
SANTHOSH BEEJADI SRINIVASA
Application Status * Service Completion zone Fee
Receipt/Reference No. Penalty Receipt No.
- 16 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
On Hold GO (Granting)
CPADBFRJW1
NA
Police Verification Mode** Passport Validity Cancelled
Passport No. ECR Status
NA NA NA
NA
Documents
Submitted
successfully
1. Aadhar Card
(Address Proof)
2. Scanned
Application
Form
3. Old passport
4.ac-f ppt-decl
Documents
Requiring Re-
submission/
Additional
Document(s)
Required
Yes
Documents
Verified with
originals,
however,
confirmation
from issuing
authority is
required
On Hold Remarks By Granting Officer : case still pending, await
for court order for SVP/Permission from Court.
Next Appointment Date and Time:27/09/2023, 12:00PM
Reporting Time:11:45 AM”
The remark is that the case is still pending, await court order
for issuance of short validity passport/await permission from
the Court.
13. Section 6 deals with grounds for refusal of
passport. Sub-section (2) (e) and (f) of Section 6 quoted
supra deal with the present situation. If the applicant at any
time during the period of five years immediately preceding
the date of application has been convicted for any offence
involving moral turpitude and sentenced thereof to
imprisonment for not less than 2 years, passport cannot be
issued or re-issued. It is not the situation in the case at
hand. Clause (f) mandates that where proceedings in respect
of an offence alleged to have been committed by the
applicant are pending before a criminal court in India, the
passport authority is empowered to deny issue of tr avel
document as obtaining in clause (c) of Sub-section (2) of
Section (5) of the Act. It is an admitted fact that proceedings
against the petitioner are pending trial in S.C.No.28 of 2017
before the learned Sessions Judge for the afore-quo ted
- 17 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
offences. Denial of re-issuance of passport is thus in
consonance with law.
14. The petitioner has relied on several judgments of co-
ordinate Benches of this Court to contend that the issue
stands answered and pendency of criminal case shoul d not
come in the way of re-issuance or renewal of passport; it can
at best be at the time of issuance of passport, at the first
instance. The co-ordinate Bench in the case of KRISHNA
CHIRANJEEVI RAO PALUKURI VENKATA (supra) though
considers Section 6(2)(f), observes that the provision would
be applicable only to issuance of a fresh passport and not for
renewal or re-issuance. For such observation, the c o-
ordinate Bench follows the judgment rendered by the High
Court of Delhi in the case of ASHOK KHANNA . The Delhi
High Court in the case of ASHOK KHANNA v. CENTRAL
BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
1
has held as follows:
“14. In the case of Ashok Kumar Sharma (Supra), the
case before this court was for re-issuance of the passport
wherein case in hand is for renewal of the passport.
15. As per Chapter I Schedule III of the Passport
Rules, 1980, passport application Form-I EA(P)-2 is for
miscellaneous services of Indian passport for (use in India)
(A) Renewal (B) Additional Visa Sheet, (C) Addition al
Booklet, (D) Change of Address, (E) PCC, (F) Additi onal
Endorsement, (G) Chief Inclusion/deletion) (H) Any other
service (specify), therefore, the case of the petitioner does
not come under Form EA(P)-1 for new/re-issue/replac ement
of lost/damaged passport.
16. The case of the petitioner is for renewal of
the passport. Neither he is asking for a new passpo rt
nor seeking re-issue or replacement of lost or
damaged passport, therefore, the said applicant is not
applicable in the case of the petitioner.
17. However, the case of the petitioner falls under
application Form EA(P)-2 and according to this application, I
note in Form EA(P)-1, passport application form (1) serial
no. 17 (a), (b) & (c) are as under:
“17(a) Have you at any time during the period of fi ve
years immediately preceding the date of this applic ation
1
2019 SCC OnLine Del 11080
- 18 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
been convicted by a court in India for any criminal offence
and sentenced to imprisonment for two years or more? If so,
give name of the court, case number and relevant sections of
Law. (Attach copy of judgment)
…………………………………………………………………..
(b) Are any criminal proceedings pending against yo u
before a court in India? If so, give name of court, case
number and relevant sections of Law.
……………………………………………………………………
(c) If answer at (b) is (Y)es, please furnish No Objection
Certificate from competent court for grant of Passport.
…………………………………………………………………..
(d) Have you been ever refused/denied passport? If yes,
give details:
…………………………………………………………………..
(e) Has your passport ever been impounded/revoked? If
yes, give details:
……………………………………………………………………
(f) Have you ever applied/granted political asylum by any
foreign country? If yes, give details:
…………………………………………………………………..”
18. Whereas in Form EA(P)-2, serial number 5 is
application which is reproduced as under:
“5. Are any criminal proceedings pending against
applicant in criminal court in India or any other
disqualifications under section 10(3).”
19. Thus, in EA(P)-2, there is no such condition to
take certificate from the court. Thus, the responde nt has
misread the provisions and contents of the two applications
mentioned above.
20. Moreover, Rule 5 is applicable for renewal of
passport which is as under:
“5. Form of applications.-[(1)] An application for the issue
of a passport or travel document or for the renewal thereof
- 19 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
or for any miscellaneous service shall be made in t he
appropriate Form set out therefore in Part I of Schedule III
and in accordance with the procedure and instructio ns set
out in such form:
[Provided that every application for any of the aforesaid
purposes shall be made only in the form printed and supplied
by-
(a) the Central Government; or
(b) Any other person whom the Central Government ma y
notification to the condition that such complies th at
Government behalf:
Provided further that] in the course of any inquiry under
sub-section (2) of section 5, a passport authority may
require an applicant to furnish such additional information,
documents or certificates, as may be considered nec essary
by such authority for the proper disposal of the application.
4[(2) The price of the new application forms referred to in
sub-rule (1) shall be as specified in column 3 or 4, as the
case may be, of Schedule III A for that particular category:
[***]
[(3) The Passport Authority may authorise any
person or authority to collect passport application s on
its behalf for issue of a passport or travel docume nt or
for the renewal thereof or for any miscellaneous
service on payment of a service charge specified by
the Central Government under sub-rule (2) of rule 8 in
addition to the fee payable under sub-rule (1) of r ule 8
and the service charge shall be paid by the applica nt to
such person or authority.]
21. In view of above provisions, there is a separate
provision for renewal of the passport, therefore, section 6 is
not applicable in the present case.
22. Though Passport Authority is not made party in
the present appeal, I exercise powers under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India, accordingly, the said authority is
directed to renew the passport of the petitioner within 15
days from the receipt of this order.”
(Emphasis supplied)
- 20 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
The subsequent judgment by another co-ordinate Benc h in
SANJAY G.KHENY (supra) relies on the afore-quoted
judgment of other co-ordinate Bench in the case of
KRISHNA CHIRANJEEVI RAO PALUKURI VENKATA and
allows the petition holding that it can at best be for issuance
of passport and cannot be for re-issuance or renewa l of
passport.
15. The judgment of the High Court of Delhi upon
which both the judgments of coordinate Benches plac ed
reliance upon was tossed before the Apex Court. The Apex
Court in terms of its order dated 02-05-2022 restricted the
question of law only to the said case. The Apex Court has, in
the case of CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION v.
ASHOK KHANNA
2
held as follows:
“1. Delay condoned.
2. In the facts and circumstances of the present
case and without expressing any opinion on the
question of law sought to be raised in these
proceedings, we are not inclined to entertain the
Special Leave Petitions under Article 136 of the
Constitution. We may also clarify that the order th e
High Court will be restricted only to the facts and
circumstances of the present case and shall have
application only to the case of the respondent.
3. The Special Leave Petitions are disposed of,
subject to the above clarification.
4. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.”
(Emphasis supplied)
The Apex Court, did not express any opinion on the question
of law. Question of law, I mean would be whether a n
applicant against whom criminal case is pending see ks
renewal/reissuance of passport, can be denied or otherwise,
but restricted the law laid down by High Court of Delhi only
to the facts and circumstances of the case of ASHOK
KHANNA and will have application only to the case before
2
SLP (Criminal) Diary No.6142 of 2022 decided on 02-05- 022
- 21 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
the Apex Court. The Special Leave Petitions were di sposed
with the said clarification.
16. Therefore, the trail of judgments would go this
way. The High Court of Delhi holds in the case of ASHOK
KHANNA, that pendency of a criminal case will not come in
the way of re-issuance of passport; this is followe d in
KRISHNA CHIRANJEEVI RAO PALUKURI VENKATA’ s
case; the said judgment is followed in SANJAY G.KHENY’ s
case. Therefore the foundation, inter alia, to ren der the
finding by both the co-ordinate Benches of this Court, was
the judgments rendered by the High Court of Delhi. In the
light of the Apex Court restricting the findings only to the
said respondent, the law declared by the co-ordinat e
Benches of this Court cannot mean that they have be come
final and would be binding on this Court to follow.
17. Reference being made to the judgment of the High Court
of Andhra Pradesh in the case of KADAR VALLI SHAIK v.
UNION OF INDIA
3
becomes apposite, the Andhra Pradesh
High Court considers the entire spectrum of the Act and
orders passed by co-ordinate Benches of this Court and holds
that Section 6(2)(f) would prevail. The summing up by the
Andhra Pradesh High Court is as follows:
“103. To sum up, this Court holds that;
(i) ‘Issue’ of passport in Section 5 of the
Passports Act includes ‘renewal’ of the passport as
well;
(ii) While considering the renewal of the
passport, the passport authority would be within it s
jurisdiction and authority to refuse renewal, on th e
same grounds as in the cases of issuance of the
passport for ‘the first time’, provided by Section 6 (2)
of the Passport Act. In other words, Section 6 (2) of
the Passport Act applies to renewal of the passport , as
well;
(iii) In the cases for renewal, to which Section 6
(2) (f) of the Passports Act is attracted, i.e., where the
applicant is facing criminal trial in a criminal Co urt in
India, renewal of the passport shall be refused,
subject to the fulfillment of the condition under t he
3
2023 SCC OnLine AP 406
- 22 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
notification of the Central Government, dated
25.08.1993, issued in exercise of the powers confer red
by Section 22 of the Passports Act, upon which such
applicant shall stand exempted from the operation o f
the provisions of Clause (f) of sub-section (2) of
Section 6;
(iv) In a case where clause (f) of Section 6 (2) is
attracted, the holder of the passport, for its rene wal,
will have to produce an order from the Court
concerned, where the proceedings against him are
pending trial in respect of an offence alleged to h ave
been committed by him, permitting him to depart fro m
India;
(v) The notification dated 25.08.1993 applies to
the citizen applicants for renewal of the passport even
if already departed from India under the passport o f
which renewal is sought.
(vi) On production of an order, from the concerned
Court, as referred in the notification, the renewal of the
passport shall not be refused only on the ground of Section 6
(2) (f), i.e., mere pendency of the criminal case for trial;
(vii) Condition (d) of the notification dated 25.08.1993
is an additional requirement and is not in substitution of the
requirement from those citizen/applicants who have to
produce an order of the Court concerned, where the criminal
case is pending, permitting him to depart from India.
(Emphasis supplied)
The Andhra Pradesh High Court holds that while cons idering
renewal or re-issuance of passport, the authority would be
within its jurisdiction to refuse renewal on the same grounds
as in cases of issuance of passport for the first time provided
in Section 6(2)(f) of the Act.
18. The unmistakable inference that can be drawn is that,
there is no difference between renewal, re-issuance or first
issuance of the passport under Section 6(2) of the Act. Every
issuance, re-issuance or renewal will have to meet the
requirements or pass through the rigours of Section 6. To
consider the submission or contra submission, hypothetically
as an illustration, at the time of issuance of passport to an
applicant, the applicant is clean and no proceeding s are
- 23 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
pending against him. In the interregnum during the validity
of the passport the applicant gets embroiled in a crime; trial
is pending or gets convicted for an offence, it cannot be said
that those facts have to be ignored and passport should be
directed to be re-issued only on the score that, it is for
renewal and no rigour for issuance of a fresh passport can be
insisted upon. This would sometimes result in the accused,
holder of a passport, fleeing justice and frustrating trial. It
may not be in all circumstances, but it is open to such
circumstance. It is, therefore, the rigour under S ection
6(2)(f) of the Act will have to be given credence a s
mandated under the statute failing which, it would render
section 6(2)(f) of the Act redundant or otiose.
19. This Bench in the case of KAJAL NARESH KUMAR
(supra) has held as follows:
“8. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The
petitioner was in possession of a passport which h ad
expired at the relevant point in time. The petitioner seeks
re-issuance of his passport on its expiry. On the basis of
the documents submitted, the respondent-Regional
Passport Officer reissues the passport in favour of the
petitioner. Later when the police verification is done as a
routine in every case, it comes to the knowledge of the
respondents that the petitioner is involved in a criminal
case in Crime No.16 of 2021. Noticing the fact tha t the
petitioner had suppressed the factum of pendency of a
criminal case against him and had secured the passport by
misrepresentation, issued a notice directing him to
surrenders the passport. The involvement of the petitioner
as an accused in Crime No.16 of 2021 is not in dispute. ‘B’
report is yet to be considered by the learned Magistrate.
Therefore, the ‘B’ report being filed will not absolve the
petitioner of the crime. Section 6 of the Act read s as
follows:
“6. Refusal of passports, travel documents,
etc.—(1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act,
the passport authority shall refuse to make an
endorsement for visiting any foreign country under
clause (b) or clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section 5
on any one or more of the following grounds, and on
no other ground, namely:—
- 24 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
(a) that the applicant may, or is likely to,
engage in such country in activities prejudicial to the
sovereignty and integrity of India;
(b) that the presence of the applicant in such
country may, or is likely to, be detrimental to the
security of India;
(c) that the presence of the applicant in such
country may, or is likely to, prejudice the friendly
relations of India with that or any other country;
(d) that in the opinion of the Central
Government the presence of the applicant in such
country is not in the public interest.
(2) Subject to the other provisions of this Act,
the passport authority shall refuse to issue a passport
or travel document for visiting any foreign country
under clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section 5 on any
one or more of the following grounds, and on no other
ground, namely:—
(a) that the applicant is not a citizen of India;
(b) that the applicant may, or is likely to,
engage outside India in activities prejudicial to the
sovereignty and integrity of India;
(c) that the departure of the applicant from
India may, or is likely to, be detrimental to the
security of India;
(d) that the presence of the applicant outside
India may, or is likely to, prejudice the friendly
relations of India with any foreign country;
(e) that the applicant has, at any time during
the period of five years immediately preceding the
date of his application, been convicted by a court in
India for any offence involving moral turpitude and
sentenced in respect thereof to imprisonment for not
less than two years;
- 25 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
(f) that proceedings in respect of an offence
alleged to have been committed by the applicant are
pending before a criminal court in India;
(g) that a warrant or summons for the
appearance, or a warrant for the arrest, of the
applicant has been issued by a court under any law for
the time being in force or that an order prohibiting the
departure from India of the applicant has been made
by any such court;
(h) that the applicant has been repatriated and
has not reimbursed the expenditure incurred in
connection with such repatriation;
(i) that in the opinion of the Central
Government the issue of a passport or travel
document to the applicant will not be in the public
interest.”
(Emphasis supplied)
Section 6 deals with refusal of passport and travel
documents etc. Section 6(2)(f) mandates that if proceedings
are pending in respect of an offence alleged to have been
committed by the applicant before a criminal Court in India,
the passport authority would have the right to refuse issue of
passport or travel documents for visiting any foreign country.
Therefore, issuance of passport or re-issuance of passport is
subject to Section 6(2)(f) of the Act.
9. It is an admitted fact in the case at hand that
a crime in Crime No.16 of 2021 is pending against t he
petitioner. The Police having filed a ‘B’ report in the
matter would not mean that proceedings against the
petitioner have culminated in her acquittal. The ri gour
of Section 6(2)(f) of the Act gets evaporated only
when the applicant who is facing criminal proceedin gs
or a FIR is acquitted, discharged or the proceeding
against the said applicant is quashed by a competen t
Court of law, in exercise of its powers under Secti on
482 of the Cr.P.C. None of these circumstances exi st
in the case at hand. All that has happened is, the
Police have filed a ‘B’ report. Mere filing of ‘B’ report
would not mean that the petitioner becomes allegati on
free qua Section 6(2)(f) of the Act.
- 26 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
(Emphasis supplied)
20. On a coalesce of the provisions of the Act, the Rules, the
judgments rendered by the co-ordinate Benches, its
restriction by the Apex Court and the judgment rendered by
this Bench, would all lead to an unmistakable conclusion that
Section 6(2)(f) and GSR 570 Notification makes a pe rson
ineligible for issuance of passport. The issuance would
include renewal or re-issuance. Separate yardstick is
nowhere indicated in the Act or the Rules. The Rules cannot
be rendered flexible to such circumstances by a stroke of pen
or a fiat of this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India. As long as Section
6(2)(f) stares at any application, be it for fresh, renewal or
re-issuance, such application cannot be directed to be
granted diluting the rigor of Section 6(2)(f). The applicant is
under a cloud, “if an applicant of the kind in the case at
hand, wants to walk over the clouds; the cloud over
such applicant must walk away.”
(Emphasis supplied)
In the light of the afore-quoted order passed by th is
Court, the application filed by the petitioner under Sections 451
and 457 of the Cr.P.C. and the impugned orders of t he
concerned Court are nullity in law. It is for the petitioner to
approach respondent No.3 seeking a short validity passport for
the purpose of travel with the conditions indicated in the afore-
quoted order being fulfilled. Respondent No.3 – Pa ssport
Authority shall consider the application of the petitioner, if filed,
and issue a short validity passport to the petitioner.
- 27 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
7. Insofar as mobile of the petitioner in P.F.No.23/2025 is
concerned, I deem it appropriate to direct the concerned Court
to release the Mobile phone of the petitioner. The release of
the mobile phone would be in terms of the judgment of the
Apex Court in the case of SUNDERBHAI AMBALAL DESAI
AND OTHERS V. STATE OF GUJARAT
4
wherein the Apex
Court considering an identical circumstance has held as follows:
"7. In our view, the powers under Section 451 CrPC
should be exercised expeditiously and judiciously. It
would serve various purposes, namely:
1. owner of the article would not suffer
because of its remaining unused or by its
misappropriation;
2. court or the police would not be required to k eep
the article in safe custody;
3. if the proper panchnama before handing over
possession of the article is prepared, that can be used in
evidence instead of its production before the court during
the trial. If necessary, evidence could also be recorded
describing the nature of the property in detail; and
4. this jurisdiction of the court to record evide nce
should be exercised promptly so that there may not be
further chance of tampering with the articles.
… … …
11. With regard to valuable articles, such as,
golden or silver ornaments or articles studded with
precious stones, it is submitted that it is of no use to keep
such articles in police custody for years till the trial is
over. In our view, this submission requires to be
accepted. In such cases, the Magistrate should pass
4
MANU/SC/1110/2002
- 28 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
appropriate orders as contemplated under Section 45 1
CrPC at the earliest.
12. For this purpose, if material on record indicates
that such articles belong to the complainant at who se
house theft, robbery or dacoity has taken place, th en
seized articles be handed over to the complainant after:
(1) preparing detailed proper panchnama of such
articles;
(2) taking photographs of such articles and a bon d
that such articles would be produced if required at the
time of trial; and
(3) after taking proper security.
13. For this purpose, the court may follow the
procedure of recording such evidence, as it thinks
necessary, as provided under Section 451 CrPC. The
bond and security should be taken so as to prevent
the evidence being lost, altered or destroyed. The
court should see that photographs of such articles
are attested or countersigned by the complainant,
accused as well as by the person to whom the
custody is handed over. Still however, it would be
the function of the court under Section 451 CrPC to
impose any other appropriate condition.
… … … …
21. However, these powers are to be exercised by
the Magistrate concerned. We hope and trust that th e
Magistrate concerned would take immediate action fo r
seeing that powers under Section 451 CrPC are prope rly
and promptly exercised and articles are not kept fo r a
long time at the police station, in any case, for not more
than fifteen days to one month. This object can also be
achieved if there is proper supervision by the Registry of
the High Court concerned in seeing that the rules framed
by the High Court with regard to such articles are
implemented properly."
(Emphasis supplied)
- 29 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
In the light of the afore-quoted judgment of the Ap ex
Court, the mobile phone of the petitioner shall be released by
way of interim custody to the petitioner by imposin g
appropriate conditions.
8. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
O R D E R
a. The Criminal Petition is allowed in part.
b.
The application filed under Sections 451 and 457 of
the Cr.P.C. and the consequential orders dated
10.10.2025 and 16.12.2025, passed by the I
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate in
C.C.No.23988/2025 and LII Additional City Civil
and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, do not merit any
consideration as they are nullity in law, insofar as
the prayer seeking release of passport –
P.F.No.24/2025 is concerned.
c.
The application filed under Sections 451 and 457 of
the Cr.P.C. insofar as prayer seeking release of
mobile seized in P.F.NO.23/2025 is concerned,
stands allowed.
d.
The impugned orders dated 10.10.2025 and
16.12.2025, passed by the I Additional Chief
- 30 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:5475
CRL.P No. 180 of 2026
Judicial Magistrate in C.C.No.23988/2025 and LII
Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru, insofar as prayer seeking release of
mobile seized in P.F.NO.23/2025 is concerned,
stand quashed.
e.
The petitioner shall the concerned Court shall
impose such conditions as is directed by the Apex
Court in the case of SUNDERBHAI (supra),
before release of the mobile phone of the
petitioner.
f.
The petitioner is directed to approach the
Authorised Officer of the Regional Passport Office
seeking short validity passport as per Section
6(2)(f) of the Indian Passport Act and GSR 570
Notification quoted hereinabove.
Ordered accordingly.
Pending I.A.’s stand disposed, as a consequence.
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA)
JUDGE
NVJ
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29
CT:SS
Legal Notes
Add a Note....