Preetam Pal v. Union Of India And 4 Others
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 10 Mar 2025
- Bench
- ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, DONADI RAMESH
- Neutral citation
- 2025:AHC:34616-DB
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 323, 504, 506
Judgment
Operative part
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Anupma Parashar, learned counsel for the respondents. Petitioner's application for issuance of passport apparently has been kept pending on account of his implication in Case Crime No.208 of 2018, under Section 504, 506, 323 IPC, Police Station Haldharpur, District Mau. Reliance is placed upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Writ - C No. 41540 of 2023 (Pawan Kumar Rajbhar Vs. Union of India & 2 Ors.), in order to contend that mere pendency of a criminal case cannot be a ground to deny issuance of passport to the petitioner. In the facts of the case, we permit the petitioner to approach the concerned court where the aforesaid case is pending for grant of no objection certificate by the court concerned so that the passport authorities take a fresh decision in the matter relating to issuance of the petitioner's passport. Petitioner, therefore, is at liberty to approach the concerned court which shall act in terms of the law laid down in Pawan Kumar Rajbhar (supra) and based upon its decision, the passport authorities would do the needful by passing appropriate orders within a further period of two months, thereafter. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 10.3.2025 Anil
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 323, 504, 506.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Allahabad High Court, on 10 Mar 2025. The bench was ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, DONADI RAMESH.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.