Allahabad High Court

EKTA LUNIA AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA AND 4 OTHERS

Decided: 19 April 2026
Bench: CHAWAN PRAKASH

Holding

The trial court must decide the application for a no‑objection certificate without treating the stay order as an impediment, as directed by the High Court.

Summary

The applicants, Ekta Lunia and another, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS Act seeking to quash an order of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate of Ghaziabad who refused to renew their passports on the ground of a pending criminal case. The High Court had earlier allowed their writ petition, directing the trial court to grant a no‑objection certificate without treating the stay order as an impediment. The magistrate, however, declined to act, citing the stay, thereby contravening the High Court’s directions. The State’s Advocate General raised no objection to the relief sought. The Division Bench held that the trial court must decide the passport‑renewal application in accordance with law and without regard to the stay, and ordered the trial court to do so within three weeks. The application was consequently disposed with these directions.

Issues considered

Whether the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate erred in refusing to decide the passport‑renewal application on the ground of the High Court’s stay order.
Whether the High Court’s direction that the trial court decide the application without treating the stay as an impediment is binding on the magistrate.
Whether Section 528 of the BNSS Act empowers the High Court to quash the magistrate’s order in these circumstances.

Legislation cited

Bureau of Non-Stationary Services Act — s. 528
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Indian Penal Code — s. 468, 471, 504, 506

Subjects

passport renewal
pending criminal case
stay order
no‑objection certificate
Section 528 BNSS
certiorari
mandamus
High Court direction
jurisdiction

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 50350 of 2025

Ekta Lunia And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

Union Of India And 4 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shivam Yadav, Udai Bhatia
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : A.S.G.I., G.A., Ved Mani Tiwari

Court No. - 79
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for applicants and learned AGA for the State.

2. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the
applicant for quashing the order dated 20.11.2025 passed by the learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad in Crl. Case no.4263 of
2023 (State Vs. Anil and others) arising out of Case Crime No.582 of
2016, P.S. Link Road, District Ghaziabad.

3. Learned counsel for applicants submits that applicant had filed a Writ -
C No.24932 of 2025 with the following prayer :

" i. Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned
communications/orders dated 27.06.2025 issued by Respondent No.3 refusing to
renew the passports of the petitioners.

ii. a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding/directing the
respondents/authorities/specifically the respondent No.3, to renew and issue a fresh
passport in favour of the petitioner in respect of application reference Nos.
GZ1079888821224 (Petitioner No.1) and GZ1079888820024 (Petitioner No.2), dated
19.07.2024, having passport No.R3105976 and P001753, respectively, forthwith in
accordance with law. "

4. The Division Bench of this Court, vide order dated 21.08.2025, allowed
the said writ petition and granted liberty to the applicant to move an
application before the concerned court for issuance of a no objection
NA528 No. 50350 of 2025
2

certificate. It was further directed that the trial court shall decide the said
application without treating the stay order of this court. Pursuant thereto,
the applicant filed an application before the Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Court No. 5, Ghaziabad. However, the learned Magistrate
declined to pass any order on the said application on the ground that the
proceedings of the trial court were stayed by the High Court. It is
submitted that the learned Magistrate has failed to comply with the
directions issued by this Court in Writ-C No. 24932 of 2025 vide order
dated 21.8.2025, and has thus committed a manifest illegality in passing
the impugned order dated 20.11.2025. Accordingly, it is prayed that the
trial court be directed to decide the aforesaid application strictly in
accordance with law.

5. Learned A.G.A. has no objection in grant of aforesaid prayer.

6. The applicants has filed a writ Writ - C No.24932 of 2025 vide order
dated 21.8.2025, which is as under:

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Devendra Narayan, learned counsel
for the respondents No.1,2 and 3 and learned Standing Counsel for the State-
respondents.

2. The following prayers have been made in the present petition:-

3. The passport of the petitioners are not being renewed apparently in view of
pendency of criminal case against the petitioners bearing Case Crime No. 0582 of
2016, Under Sections 468, 471, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Link Road,
District Ghaziabad.
NA528 No. 50350 of 2025
3

4. Leaned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have challenged the
proceedings of the criminal case by filing Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482
Cr.P.C., bearing No.24461 of 2018, within proceedings have been stayed and further
there is order for no coercive measures being taken against the petitioners.

5. It has been held by a Coordinate Bench in Writ-C No. 41540 of 2023 (Pawan
Kumar Rajbhar vs. Union of India and 2 others) and other connected matters decided
on 19.01.2024 that in such an event, it is open to the person concerned to seek no-
objection from the jurisdictional criminal court in respect of grant of passport and the
Regional Passport Officer shall act, accordingly.

6. In view of the aforesaid position, we dispose of the writ petition with liberty to the
petitioners to apply before the concerned court for no-objection and in case, any such
application is find then trial court shall decide the same without treating the stay
order of this court staying the trial as an impediment."

7. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the applicants were granted liberty
to file an application before the court concerned for seeking a no
objection certificate from the trial court. The trial court is also directed to
decide the said application without treating it the stay order of this Court.
Thereafter the applicants filed an application before the Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Court No.5, Ghaziabad but learned Magistrate has not
decide the said application by stating that proceeding of trial court is
stayed.

8. A perusal of the order sheet reveals that the learned trial court has not
complied with the directions issued by the Division Bench of this Court.
Accordingly, the trial court is directed to decide the said application
expeditiously, preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of
production of a certified copy of this order.

9. With the above directions, this application is disposed of.

(Chawan Prakash,J.)
April 20, 2026
Md Faisal

Digitally signed by :-
MOHD FAISAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…