MAHESHKUMAR MANGALDAS PRABHAKARversusTHE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE AHMEDABAD
- Disposal
- 58-RULE ISSUED & RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @FH
- Bench
- HEMANT M PRACHCHHAK
Holding
The passport must be renewed for ten years in accordance with the Bombay High Court’s guidelines and the provisions of the Passports Act.
Summary
Maheshkumar Mangaldas Prabhakar filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution and the Passports Act seeking a ten‑year passport renewal after his earlier passport expired. The Regional Passport Officer refused renewal, citing a pending criminal case and the absence of a specific period in the trial court's order, issuing only a one‑year passport per GSR Notification 570(E). The petitioner relied on the Bombay High Court’s guidelines in Narendra K. Ambwani v. Union of India, which mandate a minimum ten‑year renewal when a magistrate orders renewal under the Passport Rules. The Gujarat High Court held that the Bombay High Court’s guidelines, though not binding, are persuasive and obligate the passport authority to grant a ten‑year passport, subject to the petitioner obtaining fresh court permission for any travel abroad. Consequently, the court directed the passport authority to renew the passport for ten years and to decide the renewal application within four weeks.
Issues considered
- What period of validity must be granted for passport renewal when the trial court order does not specify a period under GSR Notification 570(E)?
- Are the Bombay High Court guidelines in Ambwani v. Union of India binding on the Gujarat High Court in interpreting the Passports Act?
- Does the passport authority have discretion to limit the passport validity in such cases?
Legislation cited
- Passports Act, 1967s. 22(a), s. 6(2)(f)
Subjects
Judgment
C/SCA/17634/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/04/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17634 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
==========================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================
MAHESHKUMAR MANGALDAS PRABHAKAR
Versus
THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE
AHMEDABAD & ANR.
==========================================
Appearance:
KAIVAN M DASTOOR(9322) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR PRADIP D BHATE(1523) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
Date : 17/04/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned Standing Counsel waives
service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondents.
2. With the consent of learned counsel for the respective parties,
the present petition is taken up for hearing.
3. Present petition is filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India and under the provisions of the Passport Act
Page 1 of 7
C/SCA/17634/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/04/2026
seeking direction to respondent – passport authority to issue passport
for a period of 10 years to the petitioner and to decide the application
preferred by the petitioner.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel
Standing Counsel for the respondents - authorities.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that under the
prevalent rules of the GSR Notification 570(E) dated 25.08.1993, the
respondent authority has to renew the passport of the petitioner for a
period of 10 years. He has submitted that as the validity of the
petitioner’s passport was expired, the petitioner had applied for
renewal of the passport for the period of 10 years, however, the
respondent has not renewed the passport on the ground that the
criminal case is pending and he is yet not charge sheeted in the
offences. He has submitted that the petitioner has to travel to abroad
but due to non-renewal of the passport, he is not able to visit. He has,
therefore, submitted that appropriate direction be passed since the
petitioner is well settled and has no intention of absconding.
5.1 Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his submissions
has relied upon the judgment of the Division Bench of Bombay High
Court reported in 2014 SCC Online Bom 356 Narendra K.
Ambwani Vs. Union of India & Ors. wherein the Bombay High
Court has issued guidelines to be followed by the passport authorities
where the Trial Court has directed that the passport may be renewed
as per the rules.
6. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents has
Page 2 of 7
C/SCA/17634/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/04/2026
submitted that the passport of the petitioner has been renewed from
time to time in terms of the GSR Notification 570(E) dated
25.08.1993. He submits that where the order of the Trial Court grants
permission to travel abroad for a period of less than 1 year but does
not specify the period, the passport has to be renewed only for 1 year.
He submits that in view of said Notification, the passport authorities
have issued the passport as per the rules and the prevalent
notifications. He submits that, however, there is no restriction on this
Court to issue a direction for issuance of the passport for a certain
period of validity as per the rules. He, therefore, submits that
appropriate directions be passed accordingly.
7. Considered the submissions and perused the documents on
record.
8. The GSR Notification 570(E) dated 25.08.1993 reads as under:-
G.S.R 570 (E)-In exercise of the powers conferred by
clause (a) of the Section 22 of the Passports Act 1967
(15 of 1967) and in supersession of the notification of
the Government of India in the Ministry of External
Affairs No. G.S.R. 298(E), dated the 14th April, 1976,
the Central Government, being of the opinion that it is
necessary in public interest to do so, hereby exempts
citizens of India against whom proceedings in respect
of an offences alleged to have been committed by
them are pending before a criminal court in India and
who produce orders from the court concerned
permitting them to depart from India, from the
operation of the provisions of Clause (f) of sub-section
(2) of Section 6 of the said Act, subject to the following
conditions, namely :-
(a) the passport to be issued to every such citizen
Page 3 of 7
C/SCA/17634/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/04/2026
shall be issued-
(i) for the period specified in order of the court
referred to above, if the court specifies a period for
which the passport has to be issued; or
(ii) if no period either for the issue of the passport or
for the travel abroad is specified in such order, the
passport shall be issued or a period one year.
(iii) if such order gives permission to travel abroad for
a period less than one year, but does not specify the
period validity of the passport, the passport shall be
issued for one year; or
(iv) if such order gives permission to travel abroad for
a period exceeding one year, and does not specify the
validity of the passport, then the passport shall be
issued for period of travel abroad specified in the
order.
(b) any passport issued in terms of (a) (ii) and (a) (iii)
above can be further renewed for one year at a time,
provided the applicant has not travelled abroad for the
period sanctioned by the court and provided further
that, in the meantime, the order of the court is not
cancelled or modified.
(c) any passport issued in terms of (a) (i) above can be
further renewed only on the basis of 3 fresh court
order specifying a further period of validity of the
passport or specifying a period for travel abroad;
(d) the said citizen shall given an undertaking in
writing to the passport issuing authority that he shall if
required by the court concerned, appear before it at
any time during the continuance in force of the
passport so issued.
9. Clause (ii) thereof states that if there is no period specified in
the order passed by the Trial Court for issuance of passport, the
Page 4 of 7
C/SCA/17634/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/04/2026
passport shall be issued for a period of 1 year. The said Notification
also specifies in Clause (i) that if the Court specifies the period for
which the passport has to be issued, then the passport shall be issued
for such a specified period. In the present case, the passport authority
has processed the renewal application of the petitioner for a period of
1 year since the Trial Court has not specified any period in its order.
10. The Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in writ petition
No.361 of 2014 dated 13.03.2014 has held thus:-
10. In the circumstances, we propose to issue
guidelines to be followed by the Respondents on
receipt of the applications for renewal of the
passports, in all cases, where the Magistrate's court
has directed that the passports may be renewed as
per the "Rules".
11. Accordingly, we issue the following directions :-
(a) In all cases where the Magistrate's court directs
renewal of the passports under the Rules, the Passport
Rules, 1980 shall apply and passports other than for a
child aged more than 15 years shall be renewed for a
period of ten years or twenty years as the case may
be from the date of its issue. All qualifying applicants
are entitled to have passport renewed for atleast ten
years. The Regional Passport Office shall renew the
passports of such qualifying applicants atleast for ten
years.
(b) In case where the passports are valid and the
applicants hold valid visas on existing passport, the
Regional Passport Officer shall issue the additional
booklet to the same passport provided the applicant
had obtained permission to travel abroad.
(c) If the learned Magistrate passes an order making
the reference to the said Notification No. G.S.R. 570(E)
Page 5 of 7
C/SCA/17634/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/04/2026
dated 26th August, 1993, the passport shall be
renewed only for such period that the Magistrate may
specify in the order or as otherwise specified in the
said Notification where the passport of the applicant is
valid for less than one year, the additional booklet
may be issued subject to the orders to be obtained in
this behalf only of the Magistrate concerned.
11. For avoidance of doubt, we clarify that the guidelines set out
herein will be applicable only in the cases where the learned
Magistrate ordered renewal of the passports as per Passport Rules,
1980 and to no other. In other cases, where the learned Magistrate
had granted permission to the accused persons to depart from India,
the provisions of Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967 and the
Notification(s) issued thereunder from time to time by the Ministry of
External Affairs or such other competent authority so empowered, will
continue to apply and directions permitting the accused persons to
depart from India and/or the orders permitting renewal of the
passports of such accused persons shall continue to be governed by
such Notification(s).
12. Though the said decision is not binding on this Court, it has
certainly a persuasive value. In the considered opinion of this Court,
the ratio of the said judgment squarely applies in the facts and
circumstances of the present case. The Central Government has
issued a Notification by exercising powers vested in it under Section
6(2)(f) of the Passport Act, 1967 being GSR Notification 570(E) dated
25.08.1993. There being an ambiguity under the provisions of the Act,
the Rules and the GSR Notification 570(E) dated 25.08.1993 issued by
the passport authority, the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court
has clarified the said ambiguity in case of Narendra K. Ambwani
Page 6 of 7
C/SCA/17634/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/04/2026
(supra). This Court is also of the considered opinion that the passport
authorities do not have any authority to decide whether the accused
has a right to travel abroad and such authority is only vested in the
Trial Court which can impose conditions if an application is made
seeking permission to travel abroad. This Court is of the considered
opinion that the directions issued by the Bombay High Court are
binding upon the passport authorities to renew the passport for a
period of 10 years as per the Act and the Rules.
13. In view of the aforesaid reasons and observations, the
respondent authority is directed to renew the passport of the
petitioner for a period of 10 years. However, it is clarified that if the
petitioner has to undertake any travel abroad, he will have to make
appropriate application to the concerned Court seeking permission to
travel abroad, which shall impose such conditions as it deems fit and
proper in case of the petitioner. The application for renewal of the
passport made by the petitioner, if any, be decided expeditiously
within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
14. With the aforesaid directions, the present Special Civil
Application is allowed and accordingly stands disposed of. Rule is
made absolute to the aforesaid extent. No order as to costs. Direct
service is permitted.
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
V.R. PANCHAL
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: VIJAYKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PANCHAL(HC00171), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 17/04/2026 16:34:55
Page 7 of 7
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.