Sh. Mukul Mittal Vs Sr. Superintendent Policy Regional Passport Office (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court held that refusal to renew passport by the passport authority to the person arrested under GST law is not justifiable since trial court has already granted No Objection Certificate [NOC] to the applicant on bail. Accordingly, concerned passport authorities are directed to renew the passports in accordance with law.
Facts- The present petition is preferred by the petitioner. The petitioner is challenging the order dated 27.02.2025 passed by the respondent, whereby the petitioner’s request for renewal of his passport was rejected. The rejection is founded on the basis that, in the absence of an order from the competent court specifically permitting the petitioner to ‘depart from India’, his renewal application could not be considered.
Conclusion- Supreme Court in Mahesh Kumar Agarwal vs. Union of India & Anr. has held that Section 6(2)(f) and GSR 570(E), read with the (Office Memorandums/ notifications issued to clarify the said GSR) cannot be read so as to convert a qualified restriction, designed to secure the presence of an accused, into a near-permanent disability to hold a valid passport, even where the criminal courts themselves do not consider such a disability necessary. It is also evident that where permission is granted by the court for renewal of a passport, even if the same is expressed in generic terms and not in the exact phraseology used in GSR 570 (E), the same shall be construed as satisfying requirements of GSR 570 (E). In such a situation, the passport shall be renewed for the period directed by the Court where the period is not specified by the Court, the passport would be renewed for a period of one year in terms of GSR 570 (E) read with the above mentioned notifications and the office memorandum.
