The Rajasthan High Court held that denial of passport renewal merely because criminal cases are pending violates the fundamental right to travel abroad under Article 21, where the accused has not been convicted.
Rajasthan High Court Sets Aside CJM’s Refusal To Grant NOC For Passport Renewal
The Rajasthan High Court recently quashed an order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), Kota, which had refused to grant a No Objection Certificate (NOC) to a 66-year-old man for renewing his passport.
A Bench of Justice Chandra Prakash Shrimali held that denying passport renewal only because criminal cases are pending violates the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Petitioner Faced 23 Pending Criminal Cases
The petitioner faces around 23 criminal cases involving allegations of cheating and forgery. All the cases are currently pending before the trial court.
During the proceedings, the petitioner applied for renewal of his passport. However, the Chief Judicial Magistrate rejected the application on April 8, 2024, mainly because of the large number of pending cases.
The petitioner then approached the Rajasthan High Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
High Court Notes No Conviction Against Petitioner
The High Court noted that the criminal trials against the petitioner are still pending and have not reached a conclusion.
The Court also observed that no court has convicted the petitioner in any of the pending matters.
Further, the petitioner informed the Court that his children live abroad and he wanted to travel overseas to meet them.
Right To Travel Abroad Is Part Of Article 21
The Court referred to Section 6(2)(e) of the Passports Act, 1967, along with decisions of the Supreme Court and various High Courts.
The Bench observed that authorities can restrict the right to travel abroad only through a fair, just and reasonable procedure.
The Court reiterated that the right to travel abroad forms part of the fundamental right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
It further clarified that the mere pendency of criminal cases cannot automatically become a ground to deny passport renewal.
Magistrate Failed To Consider Legal Position
The High Court found that the Chief Judicial Magistrate passed the impugned order without proper reasoning.
According to the Court, the Magistrate failed to consider the legal provisions and judicial precedents governing passport renewal for accused persons.
The Bench held that authorities must examine such applications on their own merits and in accordance with the law.
Passport Authority Directed To Process Fresh Application
The Rajasthan High Court ultimately set aside the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kota.
The Court directed the competent passport authority to process the petitioner’s fresh passport renewal application within 30 days from the date of submission.
It also directed the authority to consider the application strictly under Section 5 of the Passports Act, without being influenced by the Magistrate’s earlier order.
