Gujarat High Court
Gaurav Jaykumar Kaushik vs Regional Passport Office, Ahmedabad on 16 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/1925/2026 ORDER DATED: 16/02/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1925 of 2026
==========================================================
GAURAV JAYKUMAR KAUSHIK
Versus
REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, AHMEDABAD
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KURVEN K DESAI(7786) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR PRADIP D BHATE(1523) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 16/02/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. By the present Writ Petition, the petitioner has prayed for
direction to renew the passport to the petitioner for a period of 10
years.
2. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that an FIR being
No.266 of 2011 came to be lodged with the DCB Crime Police
Station for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 201, 120B
and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, which came to be culminated into
Criminal Case No.21 of 2014. He submits that thereafter the
petitioner preferred an application for bail before the learned Trial
Court, which came to be allowed on 02.04.2013 enlarging the
petitioner on regular bail. The said criminal case is pending
adjudication. Further, the petitioner has submitted an application
being Application No.26-0049487442 for renewal of passport,
however, the respondent authority has raised certain objection
citing pending criminal case on 30.01.2026, to which, the petitioner
submitted a clarification on 05.02.2026. However, on 05.02.2026,
Page 1 of 6
Uploaded by CHANDRASHEKHAR MEHESHKUMAR KOSHTI(HC01066) on Mon Feb 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 23 20:30:31 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/1925/2026 ORDER DATED: 16/02/2026
undefined
the respondent authority has further raised an objection and
directed the petitioner to furnish the court’ s permission.
3. Mr. Pradip D. Bhate, learned advocate for the respondent
submits that the passport application of the petitioner is to be
processed in accordance with the GSR Notification 570(E) dated
25.08.1993. He submits that the citizens who are facing criminal
proceedings have to produce orders from the Court concerned
permitting them to depart from India. He, therefore, submits that
the communication dated 05.02.2026 has been issued in
accordance with the GSR Notification 570(E) dated 25.08.1993.
4. Heard learned advocates for the parties, perused the
documents on record and considered the submissions.
5. At the outset, it is not in dispute that an FIR being No.266 of
2011 came to be lodged with the DCB Crime Police Station for the
offences punishable under Sections 447, 201, 120B and 34 of the
Indian Penal Code, which came to be culminated into Criminal Case
No.21 of 2014. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred an application for
bail before the learned Trial Court, which came to be allowed on
02.04.2013 enlarging the petitioner on regular bail. The said
criminal case is pending adjudication. It is also not disputed that the
petitioner has submitted application being Application No.26-
0049487442 for renewal of passport, however, the respondent
authority has raised certain objection citing pending criminal case
on 30.01.2026, to which, the petitioner submitted a clarification on
05.02.2026. Again, on 05.02.2026, the respondent authority has
raised an objection and directed the petitioner to furnish the court’ s
permission.
Page 2 of 6 Uploaded by CHANDRASHEKHAR MEHESHKUMAR KOSHTI(HC01066) on Mon Feb 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 23 20:30:31 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/1925/2026 ORDER DATED: 16/02/2026 undefined
6. The GSR Notification 570(E) dated 25.08.1993 reads as
under:-
“G.S.R 570 (E)-In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of
the Section 22 of the Passports Act 1967 (15 of 1967) and in
supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the
Ministry of External Affairs No. G.S.R. 298(E), dated the 14 th April,
1976, the Central Government, being of the opinion that it is
necessary in public interest to do so, hereby exempts citizens of
India against whom proceedings in respect of an offences alleged to
have been committed by them are pending before a criminal court
in India and who produce orders from the court concerned
permitting them to depart from India, from the operation of the
provisions of Clause (f) of sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the said
Act, subject to the following conditions, namely :-
(a) the passport to be issued to every such citizen shall be
issued-
(i) for the period specified in order of the court referred to
above, if the court specifies a period for which the passport has to
be issued; or
(ii) if no period either for the issue of the passport or for the
travel abroad is specified in such order, the passport shall be issued
or a period one year.
(iii) if such order gives permission to travel abroad for a period
less than one year, but does not specify the period validity of the
passport, the passport shall be issued for one year; or
(iv) if such order gives permission to travel abroad for a period
exceeding one year, and does not specify the validity of the
passport, then the passport shall be issued for period of travel
abroad specified in the order.
(b) any passport issued in terms of (a) (ii) and (a) (iii) above can
be further renewed for one year at a time, provided the applicant
has not travelled abroad for the period sanctioned by the court and
provided further that, in the meantime, the order of the court is not
cancelled or modified.
(c) any passport issued in terms of (a) (i) above can be further
renewed only on the basis of 3 fresh court order specifying a further
period of validity of the passport or specifying a period for travel
abroad;
(d) the said citizen shall given an undertaking in writing to the
passport issuing authority that he shall if required by the court
concerned, appear before it at any time during the continuance in
force of the passport so issued.”
Page 3 of 6
Uploaded by CHANDRASHEKHAR MEHESHKUMAR KOSHTI(HC01066) on Mon Feb 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 23 20:30:31 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/1925/2026 ORDER DATED: 16/02/2026
undefined
7. Clause (ii) thereof states that if there is no period specified in
the order passed by the Trial Court for issuance of passport, the
passport shall be issued for a period of 1 year. The said Notification
also specifies in Clause (i) that if the Court specifies the period for
which the passport has to be issued, then the passport shall be
issued for such a specified period.
8. The Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in writ petition
No.361 of 2014 dated 13.03.2014 has held thus:-
“10. In the circumstances, we propose to issue guidelines to be
followed by the Respondents on receipt of the applications for renewal
of the passports, in all cases, where the Magistrate’s court has directed
that the passports may be renewed as per the “Rules”.
11. Accordingly, we issue the following directions :-
(a) In all cases where the Magistrate’s court directs renewal of the
passports under the Rules, the Passport Rules, 1980 shall apply and
passports other than for a child aged more than 15 years shall be
renewed for a period of ten years or twenty years as the case may be
from the date of its issue. All qualifying applicants are entitled to have
passport renewed for atleast ten years. The Regional Passport Office
shall renew the passports of such qualifying applicants atleast for ten
years.
(b) In case where the passports are valid and the applicants hold valid
visas on existing passport, the Regional Passport Officer shall issue the
additional booklet to the same passport provided the applicant had
obtained permission to travel abroad.
(c) If the learned Magistrate passes an order making the reference to
the said Notification No. G.S.R. 570(E) dated 26 th August, 1993, the
passport shall be renewed only for such period that the Magistrate may
specify in the order or as otherwise specified in the said Notification
where the passport of the applicant is valid for less than one year, the
additional booklet may be issued subject to the orders to be obtained in
this behalf only of the Magistrate concerned.
12. For avoidance of doubt, we clarify that the guidelines set out herein
will be applicable only in the cases where the learned Magistrate
ordered renewal of the passports as per Passport Rules, 1980 and to no
other. In other cases, where the learned Magistrate had granted
permission to the accused persons to depart from India, the provisions
of Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967 and the Notification(s)
Page 4 of 6
Uploaded by CHANDRASHEKHAR MEHESHKUMAR KOSHTI(HC01066) on Mon Feb 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 23 20:30:31 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/1925/2026 ORDER DATED: 16/02/2026
undefined
issued thereunder from time to time by the Ministry of External Affairs
or such other competent authority so empowered, will continue to apply
and directions permitting the accused persons to depart from India
and/or the orders permitting renewal of the passports of such accused
persons shall continue to be governed by such Notification(s).
9. Though the said decision is not binding on this Court, it has
certainly a persuasive value. In the considered opinion of this Court,
the ratio of the said judgment squarely applies in the facts and
circumstances of the present case. The Central Government has
issued a Notification by exercising powers vested in it under Section
6(2)(f) of the Passport Act, 1967 being GSR Notification 570(E)
dated 25.08.1993. There being an ambiguity under the provisions of
the Act, the Rules and the GSR Notification 570(E) dated 25.08.1993
issued by the passport authority, the Division Bench of the Bombay
High Court has clarified the said ambiguity in case of Narendra K.
Ambwani (supra). This Court is also of the considered opinion that
the passport authorities do not have any authority to decide
whether the accused has a right to travel abroad and such authority
is only vested in the Trial Court which can impose conditions if an
application is made seeking permission to travel abroad. This Court
is of the considered opinion that the directions issued by the
Bombay High Court are binding upon the passport authorities to
renew the passport for a period of 10 years as per the Act and the
Rules.
10. In view of the aforesaid reasons and observations, the
respondent authorities are directed to renew the passport of the
petitioner for a period of 10 years. However, it is clarified that if the
petitioner has to undertake any travel abroad, he will have to make
appropriate application to the Trial Court seeking permission to
travel abroad, which shall impose such conditions as it deems fit
and proper in case of the petitioner.
Page 5 of 6 Uploaded by CHANDRASHEKHAR MEHESHKUMAR KOSHTI(HC01066) on Mon Feb 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 23 20:30:31 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/1925/2026 ORDER DATED: 16/02/2026 undefined
11. With the aforesaid directions, the present Special Civil
Application is allowed and accordingly stands disposed of. No order
as to costs.
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.)
cmk
Page 6 of 6
Uploaded by CHANDRASHEKHAR MEHESHKUMAR KOSHTI(HC01066) on Mon Feb 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 23 20:30:31 IST 2026
