Punjab and Haryana High Court: Passport may be issued if five years have lapsed since conviction

Saurabh Malik

Advertisement

Chandigarh, July 19

In a significant judgment liable to change the way citizens facing criminal proceedings are permitted to travel abroad, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that passport may be issued if an applicant is convicted five years prior to the date of application or the sentence is less than two years.

Mechanical denial would be travesty of justice

Youngsters are getting lifetime golden opportunities to work abroad. If a young boy/girl who has got life time opportunity to work abroad is mechanically denied passport, no one would be able to compensate and it would be travesty of justice. Justice Jagmohan Bansal

The court directed all passport authorities within its jurisdiction to consider its observations and findings, while processing pending and subsequent applications, to minimise litigation. Justice Jagmohan Bansal’s judgment on a bunch of five petitions is significant as the stand of the authorities concerned and the Union of India was that passport could be issued only on court direction to an applicant against whom criminal proceedings were pending. A notification in this regard was applicable to pending appeals as well.

Referring to the facts of a case, the respondents added an appeal was continuation of the original proceedings. Admittedly, an appeal was pending before the high court. As such, the petitioner’s case was covered by clause (f) of Section 6(2) of the Passport Act.

Justice Bansal asserted a person would be governed by clause (e) of Section 6(2) as soon as he was convicted or acquitted. The clause said passport authority might issue passport if an applicant was convicted five years prior to the date of application or sentence was less than two years.

He also ruled that clause (f) was inapplicable to post-conviction or post-acquittal proceedings. In case of clause (f), the passport holder has to produce court order for renewal, where the proceedings against him were pending.

Justice Bansal asserted travelling abroad had substantially increased and had become a part of life with the advancement of technology, improvement in means of communication and the financial status of the public at large, globalisation and opening up of economy for foreign investors, attraction to study and thereafter work out of country, increase in volume of international trade, availability of flights and an unprecedented increase in the number of tourists across the world.

Justice Bansal added: “Umpteen numbers of persons are travelling abroad for the sake of business or employment. If these persons are mechanically denied passport or permission to visit abroad, without allaying fear to flee from justice, not only would deprive them from their right to earn livelihood but also violate their fundamental right to freedom of business and profession, guaranteed by Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.”