Pending Criminal Case? Passport Can’t Be Issued Beyond a Year Without Court’s Clear Permission, Allahabad HC Holds

The Allahabad High Court has observed that passports issued to individuals facing criminal proceedings can only be valid for one year if the competent court’s permission order does not specify any duration, rejecting the plea of a petitioner who sought a full ten-year validity.

A division bench comprising Justice Ajit Kumar and Justice Swarupama Chaturvedi emphasised that the passport-issuing authority had correctly restricted the petitioner’s passport validity to one year in line with the Government of India Notification dated August 25, 1993.

The petitioner, Rahimuddin, had approached the court under Article 226 seeking a mandamus to the Regional Passport Officer, Bareilly, to reissue his passport for ten years. His passport had earlier been issued for a one-year period following a No Objection Certificate (NOC) granted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pilibhit in October 2024. The limited validity was challenged as arbitrary and contrary to statutory provisions.

The bench, however, found no merit in his argument. Referring to Clause (a)(ii) of the 1993 notification, the court held that where a criminal court’s NOC does not mention a duration, the passport authority is legally bound to issue the passport only for one year.

Court observed, “We hold that the passport-issuing authority was well within its power to grant passport having validity of one year only, and the petitioner cannot demand a passport or its renewal for ten years as a matter of right".

Court further noted that the Passport Act, 1967, read with the Passport Rules, 1980, allows the government to issue shorter-duration passports for individuals facing criminal trials. The exemption notification under Section 22 of the Act, it said, carries statutory force and ensures that accused persons cannot indefinitely travel abroad without judicial oversight.

Rejecting the petitioner’s reliance on the Pawan Kumar Rajbhar and Ishtiyak Khan judgments, the bench clarified that those cases involved distinct facts. It also referred to judgments including Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu v. CBI (2021), Rita Verma v. Union of India (2024), and Mohd. Talha v. Union of India (2025) to affirm the legal framework governing passports during pending criminal proceedings.

Court went beyond the individual dispute to address systemic delays in passport processing. It observed that many applicants rush to court without responding to notices or completing police verification. Referring to the Citizen’s Charter (June 2025), the bench reminded authorities that new passports should ordinarily be issued within 30 working days and renewals within seven days, excluding police verification.

“The police department shall ensure that all verification files pertaining to passport applications are processed with due diligence and completed within the stipulated time-frame,” the Court directed.

While dismissing Rahimuddin’s plea, the bench granted him liberty to apply for renewal before the expiry of his current passport on January 19, 2026, subject to compliance with legal requirements. Court directed the court Registrar to forward a copy of the judgment to all Regional Passport Offices in Uttar Pradesh and to the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) to ensure adherence.

Case Title: Rahimuddin vs. Union Of India And Another

Order Date: October 10, 2025

Bench: Justices Ajit Kumar and Swarupama Chaturvedi