Passport Renewal for Ten Years Obligatory Despite Pending Criminal Cases if No Trial Court Restriction Exists

The petitioner, a businessperson requiring frequent international travel, applied for the renewal/re-issue of his passport, which was set to expire on September 9, 2026

The respondent passport authority refused to renew the passport for the standard 10-year period on the grounds that two criminal cases were pending against the petitioner

The petitioner approached the High Court seeking a direction for renewal under Articles 21 and 226 of the Constitution, asserting he had no intention of absconding

1. Whether the passport authority is bound to renew a passport for a full 10-year term when criminal proceedings are pending against the applicant, provided there is no contrary order from the Trial Court

2. Whether the passport authority has the jurisdiction to decide the petitioner's right to travel abroad independent of the Trial Court

Section 6(2)(f) and Section 22 of the Passports Act, 1967, and Ministry of External Affairs Notification G.S.R. 570(E) dated 25.08.1993, which exempts citizens with pending criminal cases from passport refusal if they obtain court permission

Narendra K. Ambwani v. Union of India (WP No. 361 of 2014), which clarified that while G.S.R. 570(E) prescribes a default 1-year renewal when no period is specified by a Magistrate, a High Court may direct a 10-year renewal as per the Passport Rules, 1980

The Court observed that while Notification G.S.R. 570(E) provides guidelines for renewal when criminal cases are pending, any ambiguity regarding the duration of renewal was resolved by the Narendra K. Ambwani judgment

The Court reasoned that the passport authorities do not possess the judicial authority to determine if an accused has the right to travel; that power rests solely with the Trial Court, which can impose conditions upon a specific application for travel permission

Since the petitioner required the passport for legitimate business and the Court found the logic of the Bombay High Court's guidelines appropriate, it determined that a 10-year renewal was permissible, provided actual travel remained subject to the Trial Court's oversight

The Court held that the application must be processed within four weeks. However, it clarified that the petitioner must still obtain specific permission from the concerned Trial Court before undertaking any actual travel abroad, at which point the Trial Court may impose necessary conditions. Rule was made absolute