Bombay High Court
PARAG PRIYANKANT JHAVERIversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION BS AND FC
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court held that the restrictive condition is deleted and the passport authority must issue a fresh passport, including a ten‑year passport if the applicant is entitled under law.
Summary
The applicant, Parag Priyakant Jhaveri, filed criminal applications seeking renewal of his passport, which had expired on 24.05.2026, challenging a condition imposed by an earlier order dated 31.01.2026. The High Court examined whether the condition restricting passport renewal for a four‑year period was valid and whether the applicant was entitled to a ten‑year passport under the law, similar to co‑accused. The Court deleted the restrictive condition and directed the competent passport authority to issue a fresh passport in accordance with the applicable law. It further held that if the applicant qualifies for a ten‑year passport, it must be granted. Consequently, both applications were allowed and disposed of.
Issues considered
- What is the validity of the condition restricting the applicant's passport renewal for four years?
- Is the applicant entitled to a ten‑year passport under the law, similar to co‑accused?
Subjects
- passport renewal
- high court
- criminal application
- CBI
- ten‑year passport
- court order
- procedural direction
Judgment
49.APL.929.2026 with APL.1267.2026.doc
Ajay
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 929 OF 2026
Parag Priyakant Jhaveri .. Applicant
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr. .. Respondents
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1267 OF 2026
Parag Priyakant Jhaveri .. Applicant
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr. .. Respondents
....................
Mr. Rahul S. Arote a/w. Mr. Nikita Gawai and Mr. Jay Suryavanshi,
Advocates for Applicant.
Mr. Amit Munde, Special PP a/w. Mr. Jai Vohra and Mr. Shantanu
Nakashe, Advocates for Respondent No.1 – CBI.
Ms. Rajeshree V. Newton, APP for Respondent No.2 – State.
......…...........
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : AUGUST 28, 2026.
P.C.:
1. Heard Mr. Arote, learned Advocate for Applicant; Mr.
Munde, learned Special PP for Respondent No.1 - CBI and Ms. Newton,
learned APP for Respondent No.2 – State.
2. Condition No.2 of the operative part of the order dated
31.01.2026, inter alia, relating to renewal of passport of the Applicant
for a period of 4 years stands deleted. However, it stands substituted
by a direction issued to the concerned Competent Authority that the
1 of 2
49.APL.929.2026 with APL.1267.2026.doc
passport shall be renewed / issued afresh as applicable and in
accordance with law from the date of its expiry. Considering that the
Applicant has come to this Court quite late and the passport has now
already expired on 24.05.2026, the Passport Authority will consider
issuance of new passport in that case to the Applicant in accordance
with law.
3. If the Applicant is entitled to issuance of passport for a
period of 10 years in accordance with law, the same will be issued to
him as issued to the co-accused as per law.
4. With the above directions, both Applications are allowed and
disposed.
[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Ajay
Digitally signed
by AJAY
AJAY TRAMBAK
TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE
UGALMUGALE Date: 2026.08.28
19:13:39 +0530
2 of 2
Checking your session…