ANILKUMAR MAGANBHAI LATHIYAversusUNION OF INDIA

      C/SCA/9515/2025                            JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

            R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9515 of 2025


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

 HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
 =========================================
        Approved for Reporting              Yes      No
                                                     No
==========================================
             ANILKUMAR MAGANBHAI LATHIYA & ANR.
                              Versus
                     UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
==========================================
Appearance:
MR NV GANDHI(1693) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
MR PRADIP D BHATE(1523) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK

                             Date : 16/03/2026

                                JUDGMENT


1.       RULE returnable forthwith. Mr.Pradip Bhate, learned counsel
waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondents.


2.       With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the


3.       Present petition is 8led by the petitioners under Articles 226
and 227 of the Constitution of India and Passports Act and Rules
framed thereunder seeking the following reliefs:-

           A.    YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to admit and allow this
                 petition;


                                  Page 1 of 3
     C/SCA/9515/2025                                  JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026




          B.    YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue writ of certiorari or
                by quashing and setting aside the impugned action of blocking
                and impounding the passport of the Petitioner No.2 and further
                be pleased to direct the Respondents to immediately restore /
                release the passport of the Petitioner No.2;

          C.    YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus
                or any other appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus,
                orders and/or directions to the Respondent No.2 – Authority to
                renew the passport of the Petitioner No.2 for a full term of ten
                years, in the interest of justice;

          D.    YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to direct the Respondents to
                decide the representation dated 29.11.2024 and be further
                pleased to direct the Ld. Information O2cer to provide the
                information sought by the Petitioner No.1 vide application dtd.
                13.05.2025 pending hearing and 6nal disposal of this petition;

          E.    YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to grant ad-interim relief in
                terms of Para-D during pendency and 6nal disposal of this
                petition;

          F.    YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to pass any other and
                further order/s in the facts and circumstances of the case.


2.      Heard Mr. N. V. Gandhi, learned counsel for the petitioners and
Mr.Pradip Bhate, learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the
materials placed on record.


3.      Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the
submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties, it appears
that petitioner No.2 Vivan s/o. Mandar Pankajkumar Raval is residing
with Grandfather, petitioner No.1 herein and though the dispute took
place between the parents of the minor son, the wife left the India
and residing at USA. That at the 8rst instance, the mother of
petitioner No.2 has not disclosed true and correct fact, while applying
the passport and, therefore, the passport was impounded and,
thereafter, they have 8led fresh application for passport.


                                     Page 2 of 3
       C/SCA/9515/2025                                                                JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026




 4.         It also emerges from the record, the passport issued earlier in
 favour of the minor was impounded by the competent authority and,
 subsequently application was made for new passport, which is
 pending before the respondent – authorities. Considering the fact that
 petitioner No.2 being minor and due to concealment of the fact by his
 mother, the passport application was                                            not         proceeded by the
 authority. Though the mother has, while traveling to abroad in 2020,
 has not disclosed the correct facts before the authority, the passport
 was impounded and even the civil dispute is also pending between
 the husband and wife i.e. parents of petitioner No.2. Considering the
 aforesaid facts and circumstances, the authority concerned may
 decide the application in accordance with law.


 5.         In view of the above, the petition is allowed in part. The
 respondent – authorities is directed to decide the application which is
 pending before it and if it is found just and proper, the fresh passport
 shall be issued in favour of Vivan. The petitioner is directed to deposit
 the cost of Rs.25,000/- before the registry of this Court within a period
 of two weeks from the date of receipt of the writ of this order. After
 considering the merits of the application and if nothing adverse
 against the applicant is found, the respondent shall issue fresh
 passport. The respondent shall handover the original 8rst passport to
 the petitioners if permissible under the law. Rule is made absolute to
 the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.


                                                                      (HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
 V.R. PANCHAL

Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: VIJAYKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PANCHAL(HC00171), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 17/03/2026 16:18:21




                                                          Page 3 of 3