Jarmanjit Singh v. Union Of India And ORS

102+209 (Through Video Conferencing)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH **** CM-12308-CWP-2025 in/and CWP-15471-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 12.09.2025 Jarmanjit Singh ..... Petitioner

Versus

Union of India and others ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER

Present:

Mr. V.K. Sandhir, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Vishal Garg, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2 (through video conferencing).

***** HARSH BUNGER J. (ORAL) CM-12308-CWP-2025

CWP-15471-2025 (O&M) The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India inter alia seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus for directing the respondents to renew the passport of the petitioner.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was an accused in cross version, vide rapat No.25 dated 30.07.2022, recorded in case FIR No.198 dated 30.07.2022, under Sections 324, 323, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Jandiala Guru, District Amritsar. 2.1 It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the matter already stands compromised between the parties and the petitioner is in process of filing an appropriate petition before this Court for seeking quashing of the aforesaid case FIR and also the cross version recorded therein and in the meantime, on account of adverse Police Verification Report as regards the pendency of the aforesaid case against the petitioner, his passport application has been put on hold.

3.

At this stage, learned counsel appearing for respondents No.1 and 2 submits that since the application seeking renewal of the passport, submitted by the petitioner, has been put on hold on account of pendency of the aforesaid criminal case, however, in case the petitioner approaches the concerned passport authorities with an appropriate order seeking quashing of the aforesaid criminal case and/or a valid explanation with regard to the aforesaid criminal case, the application of the petitioner seeking renewal of the passport would be considered and processed, in accordance with law. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute to the aforesaid course of action being adopted.

5.

Keeping in view the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the respective parties, the present petition stands disposed of accordingly.

6.

It goes without saying that in case, the petitioner submits a valid explanation as regards the criminal case, pending against him and/or produces an appropriate order seeking quashing of the FIR/criminal case filed against him, then the concerned passport authorities shall consider the same and pass an appropriate order, in accordance with law. 7.

All the pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed. 12.09.2025 (HARSH BUNGER) Himani JUDGE

1. Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No

2. Whether reportable :

Yes/No