The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, has ruled that an impounded passport must be released when the underlying criminal trial has been stayed by a superior court. Observing that the criminal charges in the present case were of a “petty nature,” the Court directed the Regional Passport Office to release the document within three weeks.
The Division Bench, comprising Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary, delivered the judgment in a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner, Sunil Kumar Singh, sought the release of his passport, which had been impounded by authorities due to a pending criminal case.
Background of the Case
The petitioner’s passport was impounded by the Regional Passport Office (respondent No. 2) following the initiation of a criminal case in 2020. The FIR was registered at Police Station- Vibhuti Khand, District- Lucknow, under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 406 (criminal breach of trust), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The petitioner moved the High Court stating that he had submitted a fresh representation to the Passport Office for the release of his passport. He supported this request with documents showing that the High Court, in an Application u/s 482 No. 7772 of 2025, had already stayed the entire criminal proceedings against him.
Arguments of the Parties
Counsel for the petitioner, Shri Shivanshu Goswami, Arpit Verma, and Prerna Jalan, argued that since the entire trial court proceedings had been stayed by the High Court, the impounding of the passport was no longer justified.
In response, Shri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Advocate & DSGI, assisted by Shri Varun Pandey, representing the Regional Passport Office, contended that the petitioner should be required to obtain permission from the concerned Magistrate. He placed reliance on the principles established by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rita Verma vs. Union of India and others (2024), suggesting that the Magistrate’s oversight remained necessary for the release of the travel document.
Court’s Analysis and Observations
Upon examining the case, the Bench noted that the offenses alleged under Sections 323, 406, and 506 of the IPC were of a minor character. The Court highlighted that the High Court had already intervened in the criminal matter to stay the trial after considering the merits of the case.
The Bench observed:
“Upon perusal of the various provisions under which the criminal case is based, we are of the view that the case is of a petty nature and is a case filed in the year 2020… we are of the view that since the matter relates to release of impounded passport and the High Court has already stayed the entire proceedings of the trial court after considering the material on record, we direct the authorities concerned to release the passport of the petitioner in accordance with law.”
The Decision
The Court disposed of the writ petition with a specific direction to the Passport Office to release the petitioner’s passport in accordance with law within a period of three weeks from the date of the order.
Case Details:
- Case Title: Sunil Kumar Singh vs. Uoi Thru. The Secy. Ministry Of External Affairs New Delhi And Another
- Case No.: WRIT-C No. 2187 of 2026
- Bench: Justice Shekhar B. Saraf, Justice Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary
- Date: April 13, 2026
