Dismissed

Narayan Lal v. the Union of India

Rajasthan HC10 Jul 2024CW/11002/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petition sought renewal of a passport and quashing of a notice demanding explanation for non-disclosure of a pending criminal case. The court dismissed the petition, holding the petitioner breached bail conditions by leaving India without permission and failed to apply for court leave before departure.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition for passport renewal and quashing of the objection communication is dismissed.

Narayan Lal Vs the Union of India — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:27961]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11002/2024

¶4

Narayan Lal S/o Jaitaram, Aged About 62 Years, Ward No.11, Kalalwada, Mo Peeth, Tehsil Peeth, District Dungarpur Rajasthan Currently Residing At Newspaper Street No.23, Near Arko International Co., Opposite Ali Ai- Ghanim Bmw Co., Shuwaikh, Kuwait Thorugh Its Wife Smt. Asha Devi W/o Narayan Lal, Aged About 61 Years, R/o Ward No.3, Kalalwada, Mo Peeth, Tehsil Peeth, District Dungarpur Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The Union Of India, Through The Principal Secretary, Ministry Of External Affairs, South Block, New Delhi

¶8

The Central Passport Organization, Through The Joint Secretary (Psp) And Cpo, Passport Seva Project Division, Ministry Of External Affairs, Room No.27, Patiala House, Tilak Marg, New Delhi

¶9

The Under Secretary, Passport Seva Project-I, Ministry Of External Affairs, Room No.30 G, Patiala House, Tilak Marg, New Delhi

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Siddharth Lalas For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Rajpurohit, Dy. S.G.

¶12

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA Order

¶13

10/07/2024

¶14

The present writ petition has been preferred with a prayer to direct for renewal of the passport of the petitioner and for quashing of the order dated 10.06.2024 (Annexure-8) whereby the petitioner was called upon to furnish a suitable explanation regarding suppression of information in his passport application.

¶15

The facts are that the petitioner who has been working in the State of Kuwait since the year 1994, had been issued a residency permit by the said State which is valid up to 12.07.2024. The passport of the petitioner was last renewed from the Embassy of

[2024:RJ-JD:27961]

[CW-11002/2024]

(2 of 3)

India at Kuwait on 11.05.2015 which is now to expire on 10.05.2025.

¶20

When the petitioner was in India, an FIR dated 18.12.2018 bearing No.376/2018 came to be lodged against him at Dhambola, District Dungarpur qua which he was granted bail on 19.03.2019. After the bail been granted, the petitioner again left for Kuwait but as per the rules governing the residency permit in the State of Kuwait, a person is required to have at least one year validity on his passport. Therefore, as the validity of the petitioner’s passport was due to expire on 10.05.2025, he applied for renewal of the same at the Indian Embassy at Kuwait. However, an objection to his renewal application was raised because of a criminal case pending against him and because of the fact that the information regarding such pendency was not disclosed in his renewal application.

¶21

In view of the same, vide the impugned communication dated 10.06.2024, the petitioner was directed to furnish a suitable explanation regarding the suppression of the above fact and in the alternate, to submit a case closure order or permission from the concerned Court for a short validity passport during the pendency of criminal proceedings. It is the said communication which is under challenge in the present petition.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the renewal application whatsoever, was not filled up by the petitioner and he was not aware of any suppression been made in the same. Counsel further submits that the petitioner left for Kuwait only after the bail been granted to him by a competent Court and hence, his passport deserves to be renewed.

[2024:RJ-JD:27961]

[CW-11002/2024]

(3 of 3)

Heard the counsel and perused the material available on record.

¶27

A bare perusal of the bail order dated 19.03.2019 (Annexure-4) makes it clear that it was a specific condition that the petitioner would not leave India without the permission of the Court. Evidently, neither such permission had been taken by the petitioner from any Court nor is there any document available on record to show that the petitioner left India with the leave of the Court. It is also evident that after the anticipatory bail been granted to the petitioner vide order dated 19.03.2019, a chargesheet has also been filed in pursuance to which the petitioner is under trial.

¶28

In view of the above facts, it is clear that the petitioner had clearly breached the condition of the bail order and left India without the leave of the Court. Further, if the petitioner was desirous of obtaining any leave/permission/short validity passport, he ought to have moved before the Court where he is under trial. No ground for issuance of any direction for renewal of the petitioner’s passport by this Court, is made out. The present writ petition being devoid of merit is hence, dismissed .

¶29

Stay application and other pending applications, if any, stands disposed of .

¶30

(REKHA BORANA),J

¶31

300-KashishS/-

Narayan Lal v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narayan Lal v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohan Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Kashiram Vs Lrs. of Late Surendra Kumar

Gopal Lal Gaur Vs J.K. White Cement Works

Lrs of Rajaram Modi Vs Deepak Pathak

Ganpat Singh Chundawat Vs Srg Housing Finance Limited

Leeladhar Vs Leelawati