Disposed

Shivam Seth v. Union of India and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC3 May 2024CWP/4260/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Writ Petition, the petitioner sought a direction for the re-issue of an expired passport during a pending CBI investigation where charges were not framed. The Court disposed of the petition, directing the passport authority to consider the application and deposit any issued passport with the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed; Passport Authority directed to consider application and deposit passport with trial court if issued.

Shivam Seth Vs Union of India and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

101

¶3

�� CWP No. 4260 of 2024 Date of Decision:03.05.2024

Shivam Seth

….Petitioner

vs.

Union of India and another

¶8

….Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

¶10

Present: Mr. Naveen Bawa, Advocate for the petitioner

¶11

Mr. Karan Kumar Jund, Senior Panel Counsel for the Union of India

¶12

Mr. Rajeev Anand, Advocate for CBI

¶13

¶14

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL)

¶15

The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondents to re-issue him passport.

¶16

Amended Memo of Parties is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at appropriate place.

¶17

The petitioner was issued passport on 23.03.2012 which was valid upto 22.03.2022. An FIR No. RCCHG2015A0002 dated 15.01.2015, under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and Section 13(1) (d) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, has been registered against the petitioner at CBI/ACB Branch, Chandigarh. The CBI

¶18

PARAMJIT KAUR SAINI 2024.05.03 02:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

CWP No. 4260 of 2024 -2- ��

¶20

has completed investigation and presented its report, however, till date charges have not been framed.

¶21

Mr. Naveen Bawa, Advocate submits that in the absence of framing of charge(s), the petitioner cannot be deprived from passport. He is not seeking permission to visit abroad whereas his limited prayer is to re-issue passport which has already expired. The issuance of passport and permission to visit abroad are two different concepts. No prejudice is going to be caused to CBI if passport is issued.

¶22

Mr. Rajeev Anand, Advocate submits that if passport is issued by passport authority, in accordance with law, it may be deposited with trial Court so that petitioner may not leave country without prior permission of the Court.

¶23

Mr. K.K.Jund, Senior Panel Counsel for Union of India submits that passport authority would look into application of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order, in accordance with law. The needful shall be done within eight weeks from today.

¶24

In the wake of statement of both sides, the petition stands disposed of. If the passport authority comes to a conclusion that passport may be issued, it would be directly deposited with the trial court.

¶25

(JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE

¶26

03.05.2024 paramjit

¶27

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether reportable:	No

¶28

PARAMJIT KAUR SAINI 2024.05.03 02:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Shivam Seth v. Union of India and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivam Seth v. Union of India and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Buta Ram Sharma Vs Union of India and Another

Kulwinder Singh Sidhu Vs Union of India and Others

Saraj Singh Vs Union of India and Others

Jaspal Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Others

Sukhdev Singh Brar Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Harinder Pal Singh Vs Union of India and Others