Allahabad High Court
NIRDESH KUMARversusUNION OF INDIA AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that only a one‑year passport may be issued, with automatic renewal as long as the No Objection Certificate continues, rejecting the petition for a ten‑year passport.
Summary
Petitioner Nirdesh Kumar filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a passport valid for ten years as prescribed under the Passports Act, 1967. Respondents argued that, because the petitioner is involved in a criminal case, only a one‑year passport may be issued, subject to a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the trial court and a government notification. The Court examined the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate and the relevant notification, concluding that where an NOC is granted but the criminal trial is pending, the passport’s validity is limited to one year unless the court orders otherwise. The Court further directed that the passport may be automatically renewed as long as the NOC remains in force. Accordingly, the petition for a ten‑year passport was dismissed and the writ petition was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether a passport can be issued for ten years to a person pending criminal trial with a No Objection Certificate.
- Whether the period of passport validity is limited to one year under the applicable notification when no specific period is prescribed in the NOC.
- Whether automatic renewal of the passport is permissible while the NOC remains valid.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- passport
- Article 226
- No Objection Certificate
- criminal case
- passport renewal
- High Court
- writ petition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 23841 of 2026
Nirdesh Kumar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Union Of India And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Gaurav Tiwari, Mumtaz Ahmad
Siddiqui, Riyaz Ahmad Siddiqui
Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., C.S.C., Rajesh Tripathi
Court No. - 1
HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.
HON'BLE SIDDHARTH NANDAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the
State-respondents and Sri Rajesh Tripathi, learned counsel for the
respondent nos. 1 and 2.
2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution,
petitioner has prayed for a direction to the Regional Passport Officer to issue
passport, which would be valid for a period of ten years as per the period
prescribed under The Passports Act, 1967.
3. Per contra, it is argued by the learned counsel for respondents nos. 1 & 2
that a passport for a period of one year can be issued as the applicant is
involved in a criminal case and has obtained No Objection Certificate from
the Criminal Law Court concerned to travel abroad and to possess a valid
passport, in view of the notification issued by the Ministry of External
Affairs as well as the Home Ministry.
4. We have perused the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court
No. 4, Moradabad. Thus, in the circumstances and in view of the notification
issued by the Ministry concerned, passport can only be valid for a period of
one year, if no time period is prescribed under the order granting No
Objection.
5. However, we may clarify that in the event that No Objection has already
been granted and the criminal case remain pending, the petitioner would not
be required to furnish No Objection again and again unless and until the trial
WRIC No. 23841 of 2026
2
Court passes any order contrary to the earlier order passed.
6. In the aforesaid circumstances, while we justify the issuance of a passport
which is valid for one year, we further provide that renewal of passport shall
also automatically take place so long as the No Objection Certificate issued
by the trial Court continues.
7. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
September 16, 2026
Junaid
(Siddharth Nandan,J.) (Ajit Kumar,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
JUNAID AHMAD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…