Allahabad High Court
AVUSADversusUNION OF INDIA AND 5 OTHER
- Decided
Holding
The petitioner must obtain a no‑objection certificate or permission from the court where the criminal case is pending (or the superior court that stayed it) before the passport authorities can re‑issue his passport.
Summary
The petitioner, Avusad, applied for re‑issuance of his passport which was being held up due to his involvement in a pending criminal case (Case Crime No. 0357 of 2025) under several sections of the Indian Penal Code. He relied on the Allahabad High Court’s earlier decisions in Pawan Kumar Rajbhar v. Union of India (2023) and Rahimuddin v. Union of India (2025), arguing that mere pendency of a criminal case does not bar passport issuance if the petitioner obtains permission from the appropriate court. The Court held that the petitioner must approach the court where the criminal matter is pending, or the superior court that has stayed the proceedings, to obtain a no‑objection certificate. Upon such permission, the passport authorities are directed to decide on the re‑issuance within two months. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether the pendency of a criminal case is a valid ground to deny re‑issuance of a passport.
- Whether the petitioner must obtain permission from the court where the criminal case is pending or from a superior court that has stayed the proceedings before the passport can be re‑issued.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2)
Subjects
- passport re‑issuance
- criminal case pendency
- no‑objection certificate
- superior court permission
- writ petition
- Indian Penal Code
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 8148 of 2026
Avusad
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Union Of India And 5 Other
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dheerendra Kumar, Karma Singh
Yadav, Pawan Kumar Vishwakarma
Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., C.S.C.
Court No. - 2
HON'BLE ATUL SREEDHARAN, J.
HON'BLE SIDDHARTH NANDAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. None appears on behalf of
Union of India.
2. Petitioner's application for re-issuance of passport apparently has been
kept pending on account of his implication in criminal case. Reliance is
placed upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Writ - C No.
41540 of 2023 (Pawan Kumar Rajbhar Vs. Union of India & 2 Ors.), in
order to contend that mere pendency of Case Crime No. 0357 of 2025,
under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) B.N.S., P.S.
Gambhirpur, District- Azamgarh cannot be a ground to deny re-issuance
of passport to the petitioner, provided appropriate permission is taken by
the petitioner from the Court, where the case is pending.
3. A learned co-ordinate Bench in Rahimuddin Vs. Union Of India And
Another, Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:181505-DB has
unequivocally held that where a criminal case has been stayed by a
superior Court, the permission for issuance of passport, shall be sought
from the superior Court, which stayed the criminal proceedings.
4. In the facts of the case, we permit the petitioner to approach the
concerned court where the aforesaid case is pending for grant of no
objection certificate or approach such superior Court, which has stayed
the proceeding before the trial court or has passed the order granting any
interim protection to the petitioner, so that the passport authorities take a
WRIC No. 8148 of 2026
2
fresh decision in the matter relating to re-issuance of the petitioner's
passport. Petitioner, therefore, is at liberty to approach the concerned
court which shall act in terms of the law laid down in Pawan Kumar
Rajbhar and Rahimuddin (supra) and based upon its decision, the
passport authorities would do the needful by passing appropriate orders
within a further period of two months, thereafter.
5. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of.
(Siddharth Nandan,J.) (Atul Sreedharan,J.)
March 19, 2026
piyush
Digitally signed by :-
PIYUSH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…