Pending Criminal Case Can’t Be Reason To Deny Right to Renewal of Passport: Bombay High Court

0

Last Updated: January 20, 2023, 20:57 IST

The High Court then quashed and set aside the order passed by Metropolitan Magistrate, Vikhroli Court. (Representative image: Shutterstock)

The High Court then quashed and put aside the order handed by Metropolitan Magistrate, Vikhroli Court. (Representative picture: Shutterstock)

The courtroom famous that the renewal of a passport is regulated by the provisions of the Passport Act and the Additional Sessions Judge had permitted the applicant to journey to the United State of America

A Bombay High courtroom bench comprising Justice Amit Borkar has just lately noticed that merely the pendency of an offence beneath Sections 406, 420, 120(b) learn with 34 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) not enough grounds to deny an applicant the appropriate to renew his passport.

The High Court was listening to a plea filed by an applicant towards the rejection of the renewal of a passport to journey overseas. The applicant had utilized for renewal of the passport earlier than the Metropolitan Magistrate 31st Court, Vikhroli, Mumbai which was rejected by the Justice of the Peace on the grounds that the investigation was not full, one of the accused is absconding and that there are probabilities of tampering of proof.

The courtroom famous that the renewal of a passport is regulated by the provisions of the Passport Act and the Additional Sessions Judge had permitted the applicant to journey to the United State of America from July 17, 2017 to August 11, 2019. Further, there was no allegation that the applicant had breached the situations imposed by the Court whereas granting permission to journey overseas.

The courtroom stated: “In the information of the case merely as a result of the offence beneath Sections 406, 420, 120(b) learn with 34 of IPC is pending towards the applicant, the stated reality by itself is just not enough to deny the appropriate of the applicant for renewal of the passport. There isn’t any materials on file to present that the applicant carries flight and danger The applicant has immovable property at Mumbai. The applicant’s son is working at Melbourne, Austrilia. In view of the Division Bench of Hon’ble High Court within the case of Narendra Okay. Ambawani Vs. Union of India W.P. No. 361 of 2014. The utility for renewal of passport wants to be granted”

The High Court then quashed and set aside the order passed by Metropolitan Magistrate, Vikhroli Court. Further, the court directed to scrutinize the eligibility of the applicant as required under the provisions of the Passport Act and pass the order in accordance with the law on the application for renewal of the passport of the applicant.

Read all of the Latest India News right here

Source hyperlink

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here