Petitioners implicated in a dowry/cruelty FIR sought directions for passport issuance despite pending criminal trial. Citing a 1993 Central Government notification requiring trial court permission, counsel sought withdrawal with liberty; the petition was dismissed as withdrawn.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
103
2024:PHHC:034942 CWP No.1382 of 2024 Date of Decision:12.03.2024
Kulwinder Kaur and another
….Petitioners
vs.
Union of India and others
….Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Present: Mr. Nippun Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. Shivendra Pal, Central Govt. Counsel for the Union of India
Mr. Aman Dhir, DAG, Punjab
***
JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL)
PARAMJIT KAUR SAINI 2024.03.12 05:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP No.1382 of 2024 -2- 2024:PHHC:034942
an applicant, he will seek permission from trial court for issuance or reissuance of passport.
(JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE
12.03.2024 paramjit
| Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes | |
|---|---|
| Whether reportable: | No |
PARAMJIT KAUR SAINI 2024.03.12 05:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the court should direct issuance of passports to petitioners facing pending criminal proceedings.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Kulwinder Kaur
another
Union of India
others
Jagmohan Bansal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
