Allahabad High Court

RAKESH KUMARversusUNION OF INDIA AND 4 OTHERS

Decided: 7 September 2026
Bench: SAURABH SRIVASTAVA

Holding

The application is dismissed as maintainable only in the earlier proceeding where interim protection was already extended.

Summary

Rakesh Kumar filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking a fresh passport. The applicant relied on a prior order dated 17 July 2025 in which interim protection for passport issuance had been extended in a related application (No. 22997 of 2025). The Union of India contended that the present application was not maintainable because the same relief should be sought in the earlier proceeding, as endorsed by the Supreme Court’s decision in Rahimuddin v. Union of India. The Court examined the earlier order and the precedent, concluding that the jurisdiction to grant passport renewal lies with the court handling the earlier application. Consequently, the instant application was disposed, with liberty granted to the applicant to file a fresh application in the pending proceeding, if advised.

Issues considered

Whether a fresh application for passport issuance under Section 528 BNSS is maintainable when interim protection has already been extended in an earlier application.
Which court has jurisdiction to entertain applications for passport renewal or extension when a criminal trial is pending.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 528

Subjects

passport
interim protection
jurisdiction
Section 528 BNSS
fresh application
criminal trial pending
renewal
extension

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 35330 of 2026

Rakesh Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
Union Of India And 4 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akash Kumar Nishad, Subhash Chandra
Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : A.S.G.I., Annapurna Singh, G.A.

Court No. - 79
HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Heard Sri Ashutosh Kumar Shukla, Advocate holding brief of Sri Akash
Kumar Nishad, learned counsel for applicant and Sri Shishir Prakash Singh,
learned ASGI assisted by Ms. Annapurna Singh Chandel along with Sri
Kuldeep Singh Chauhan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Union of
India.

2. By means of the instant application filed under Section 528 BNSS, the
applicant has sought direction in favour of opposite party nos.3 and 4 to
issue new/fresh passport in favour of applicant.

3. At the very outset, a precise query has been made before learned counsel
for applicant that whether his any application seeking the same prayer as
sought through the instant application, has ever been rejected by learned
court concerned, in response to the same, he submitted that there is hardly
any denial of learned court concerned in writing but at the same time, sought
attention of the Court over order dated 10.10.2025 passed by a Division
Bench of this Court in Rahimuddin Vs. Union of India and another (Writ
C No.34412 of 2025).

4. The ratio of the said judgment specifically provides an opportunity for
seeking/extending passport in favour of a person against whom a criminal
trial is pending, the application for seeking extension/renewal or issuance of
passport shall lie before the same court where proceedings of trial has been
stayed.

5. Learned counsel for applicant informed that interim protection has already
NA528 No. 35330 of 2026
2

been extended in favour of applicant vide order dated 17.07.2025 passed by
a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Application U/S 528 BNSS No.22997 of
2025 (Mamta Devi and others Vs. State of U.P. and another).

6. Ms. Annapurna Singh Chandel, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
Union of India vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant
application and argued that the instant application is not maintainable on the
ground that interim protection has already been extended in favour of
applicant vide order dated 17.07.2025 passed in Application U/S 528 BNSS
No.22997 of 2025, therefore all the ancillary proceedings or application for
seeking NOC, lies before the same Court where the said application is
pending in pursuance of judgment passed in Rahimuddin (supra).

7. On due consideration to the arguments advanced alongwith perusal of the
records, it is evident that interim protection has already been extended in
favour of applicant vide order dated 17.07.2025 passed in Application U/S
528 BNSS No.22997 of 2025, therefore the arguments raised by learned
counsel appearing on behalf of Union of India is quite justified that
application for seeking extension/renewal or issuance of passport, be
preferred in the same proceedings wherein interim protection has already
been extended in favour of applicant.

8. In view of the above discussions, the instant application is hereby
disposed of with liberty to applicant to prefer fresh application, if advised,
for any cause of action arising out of renewal/extension/issuance of passport
before the Court where Application U/S 528 BNSS No.22997 of 2025 is
pending in light of judgment passed in Rahimuddin (supra).

September 8, 2026
Vivek Kr.
(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
VIVEK KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…