Disposed¶20

Dr.Mahesh Pandey v. Union of India Thru. Secy. Mini. of External Affairs New Delhi and 3 Others

Allahabad HC11 May 2026WRIC/4842/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Passport renewal refused pending criminal case; Article 226 mandamus; F.I.R./Case Crime No. 273 of 2025; Sections 316(2), 351(2), 352 BNS; P.S. PGI District Lucknow; criminal case stayed by Single Judge (Application U/s 528 BNSS No. 981 of 2026); petty offences, maximum punishment three years; travel abroad for family function in USA; Regional Passport Officer directed to renew passport within ten (10) days; writ petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Renewal of passport No. N3216780 by the Regional Passport Officer within ten (10) days from the date of production of a certified copy of the order. ¶20

Dr.Mahesh Pandey vs Union of India Thru. Secy… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 4842 of 2026

Dr.Mahesh Pandey

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

Union Of India Thru. Secy. Mini. Of External Affairs New Delhi And 3 Others

¶7

			.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Mukesh Pandey : A.S.G.I.,	Kumar Tewari, C.S.C.	Ashish Kumar

¶8

Court No. - 3

¶9

HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J. HON'BLE ABDHESH KUMAR CHAUDHARY, J.

¶10

1 . Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

¶11

2 . This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, wherein the writ petitioner has prayed for the following main relief(s):-

¶12

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby commanding and directing the opposite parties particularly opposite party no.3 to renew the passport No. N3216780 of the petitioner namely- Mahesh Pandey son of Murlidhar Pandey, mother of Padma Pandey resident of Sugar Factory Nawabganj Tehsil- Tarabganj Gonda, in the interest of justice."

¶13

3. In the present case, the petitioner has sought renewal of his passport, which is presently pending due to a criminal case being registered as F.I.R./Case Crime No. 273 of 2025, under Sections 316(2), 351(2) and 352 of the BNS, at Police Station PGI, District Lucknow.

¶14

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that the aforesaid case against him has been stayed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Application U/s 528 BNSS No. 981 of 2026 (Dr. Mahesh Pandey vs. State of U.P. and others).

¶15

5. He further submits that the maximum punishment under the aforesaid sections is only three years, and he prays that, since the offences are petty in nature, he may be allowed to travel abroad for the upcoming family function in United States of America (USA)

¶16

WRIC No. 4842 of 2026

¶17

¶18

6. We have considered the averments made in the writ petition and are satisfied that, in the present case, the Regional Passport Officer may be directed to renew the passport, keeping in consideration the fact that the original case against the petitioner has been stayed by the High Court and also the fact that the case against the petitioner pertains to petty offences.

¶19

7. Accordingly, the Regional Passport Officer is directed to renew the passport of the petitioner within a period of ten (10) days from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

¶20

8 . With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶21

May 11, 2026 Praveen

¶22

(Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.)

¶23

Digitally signed by :- PRAVEEN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dr.Mahesh Pandey v. Union of India Thru. Secy. Mini. of External Affairs New Delhi and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.Mahesh Pandey v. Union of India Thru. Secy. Mini. of External Affairs New Delhi and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mo Hasim Thru. Power of Attorney in Favour of Soni vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of External Affair Govt. of India New Delhi and Another

Mohd.Jeeshan vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of External Affairs New Delhi and 3 Others

Victim X in Case Crime No. 235/2024 Thru. His Father/Complainant Y in Case Crime NO.235/2024 vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Social Welfare Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Munna vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Lko. and 3 Others

Mohammad Amaan vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko and 2 Others

Mohan Lal and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. and 5 Others