Disposed

Mohammad Abrar Khan v. Union of India and 3 Others

Allahabad HC9 Dec 2024WRIC/39780/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition over pendency of a passport application due to police verification issues. The court disposed of it on identical terms to a prior disposed petition, directing fresh intimation by State authorities and processing by the Regional Passport Office accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed on same terms as Writ - C No. 41540 of 2023; State authorities to send fresh intimation within two weeks and Passport Office to act accordingly.

Mohammad Abrar Khan vs Union of India and 3 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:192613-DB

¶2

Court No. - 39

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 39780 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Mohammad Abrar Khan Respondent :- Union Of India And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dharmendra Kumar Singh,Vijay Laxmi Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J. Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J.

¶6

Petitioner is aggrieved by pendency of his application for issuance of passport.

¶7

The facts of the present case are identical to those in Writ - C No. 41540 of 2023 (Pawan Kumar Rajbhar Vs. Union of India & 2 Ors.) . That writ petition has been disposed of vide order dated 19.01.2024, in the following terms:

¶8

"26. Paragraph 2 of Part A of the existing form for Police Verification Report reads:

¶9

"2. Is the applicant facing any criminal charges in any Court ? Yes / No (if YES, please provide specific details of the criminal case)"

¶10

Thus, as to the modalities to enforce the above, as suggested by Sri A.K. Sand, learned Government Advocate, henceforth all police reports submitted to the Regional Passport Office would specify against the above field the desired/relevant information as below:

¶11

(1) In 'Part A' of the Police Verification Report (submitted through online mode), against item '2', for the time being, option 'YES' may be selected in all cases where either a NCR and/or FIR may be found registered against the applicant. Second in that field (that may then be activated), details of such NCR and/or FIR may be given on the following format:

¶12

NCR No.................... ; P.S; ......................

¶13

AND/OR

¶14

FIR No................. ; U/s .............. (section description); P.S. (details of Police Station), .................. under Court (Court details)................

¶15

27. On the above intimation being received, the Regional Passport Offices, for the State of Uttar Pradesh shall ensure: (1) Such minimum information is uploaded on its web portal visible to the individual applicant. In addition, whenever any FIR may be registered, that web portal would indicate to the

¶16

applicant to apply and obtain permission from the competent Court of criminal jurisdiction, before his application may be processed. (2) That information may also be communicated to the applicant by issuance of a physical notice as before. (3) The Union of India/respondent No. 1 may upgrade its infrastructure to (i) ensure sending intimation of such notice to the applicant through appropriate message on his mobile phone, wherever such details are available. (ii) upload the entire notice on its web portal. Demand of good e-governance may prompt such step to be taken expeditiously, as has already been done in case of fiscal statutes. (4) As fairly stated by the learned A.S.G.I., in cases where any NCR may be registered, the necessary Passport may be issued, reissued, renewed, as the case may be, without any delay. No permission may be sought or required from the competent court of criminal jurisdiction, in those cases.

¶17

28. Considering the time required by an applicant to apply to the competent Court of criminal jurisdiction and the time that may be consumed in grant of such prayer, the Regional Passport Office, Uttar Pradesh may also ensure that the intimation of pendency of criminal proceeding is shared with the applicant at the earliest i.e. within one week from the date of receipt of such intimation from the relevant State Authority. Thereupon, adequate time-not less than eight weeks may be granted to the concerned applicant to obtain that permission and inform the Regional Passport Office, accordingly. During that period his application may be kept pending. Once due permission is received the Regional Passport Officer may not delay the issuance, reissuance, renewal of passport beyond one week from receipt of such information.

¶18

29. As to the further course to be adopted we do not make any observation and leave it to the Regional Passport Officer and the State Authorities to continue to act in accordance with law. In that regard, we have been apprised of certain directions issued by other High Courts requiring a deep revision of the procedures. The present order does not seek to add or modify any such order. We only seek to ensure efficiency under the current procedures .

¶19

30. Last we clarify that these directions have been issued in addition to and not by way of substitution of any direction issued in the case of Basoo Yadav (supra).

¶20

31. In so far as the present petitioners are concerned, we require the State Authorities to send fresh intimation to the Regional Passport Officer in compliance of these directions, within a period of two weeks from today. The Regional Passport Office shall act in accordance with these directions and issue necessary communications to the individual petitioners, in writing.

¶21

32. Since two month time has been granted to all individual applicants, therefore, subject to the petitioners applying to the concerned Court within two weeks from the date of receipt of intimation from the Regional Passport Office, we expect the concerned Courts to pass appropriate orders not later than four weeks therefrom. However, in cases involving urgency, those orders may be made expeditiously, commensurate to the urgency cited."

¶22

For the same facts and on the same reasoning, the present

¶23

petition is also disposed of, on the same terms and conditions.

¶24

Ms. Swarnalata Suman, learned Advocate has appeared for the Union of India and learned Standing Counsel is appearing for the State-respondent.

¶25

Order Date :- 9.12.2024 P Kesari

¶26

(Donadi Ramesh, J.) (S.D. Singh, J.)

¶27

Digitally signed by :- PRACHI KESARWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohammad Abrar Khan v. Union of India and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Abrar Khan v. Union of India and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surendra Kumar Jaiswal vs State of U.P. through Its Chief Secretary and 2 Others

Ram Asare Ram and Another vs State of U.P. and 9 Others

Mahesh Chandra @ Bhudev Sharma vs Smt. Disha Sharma

Ajay Singh Tyagi and 3 Others vs State of Up and 5 Others

Imran vs State of U.P through Its Principal Secretary (Home) and 11 Others

Rameshwar Kumar vs State of Up and 3 Others