Manish Anil Daryani v. The Union Of India, Thr. Secretary, Ministry Of External Affairs, New Delhi And ORS.

2026:BHC-NAG:887-DB 120.WP.436.2026 1/2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 436 OF 2026 Manish Anil Daryani Vs. The Union of India & Ors. ______________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders.

Mr. N.A. Parwani, Advocate for the Petitioner. ------------------------------- CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR AND R AJ D. WAKODE , JJ.

DATE : 19.01.2026 Heard Mr. N.A. Parwani, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2.

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking challenge to the impugned order dated 18th December, 2025, passed by respondent No.3 - Regional Passport Officer, Nagpur. By the said order, respondent No.3 has impounded the petitioner's passport on the basis of an adverse police vigilance report, which refers to Crime No.251/2020 registered against the petitioner under Sections 188, 270, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, at Police Station Civil Lines, Akola. 3.

The contention is that the petitioner has already been discharged from the aforesaid criminal proceedings by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.5, Akola, vide order dated 10th December, 2025, passed in S.C.C. No.971/2021, which is at record page No.52 (Annexure-F). Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the petitioner was discharged on 10th December, 2025, the impugned order came to be passed on 18th December, 2025, and therefore is unsustainable in the eyes of law. 4.

However, the fact remains that respondent No.3 had issued notices to the petitioner on different occasions prior to

120.WP.436.2026 2/2 impounding the passport. Since the petitioner did not appear and did not bring the fact of discharge to the notice of respondent No.3, the impugned order was passed. 5.

The petitioner has specifically stated on oath in the writ petition that the notices issued by respondent No.3 were never received by him, and therefore he could not appear before respondent No. 3.

6.

Be that as it may, the petitioner has now approached respondent No.3 by submitting a representation on 2nd January, 2026, bringing to his notice the petitioner's discharge in the criminal proceedings, on the basis of which the petitioner's passport had been impounded.

7.

In view of the above, we dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to respondent No.3 to decide the representation dated 2nd January, 2026, which is at record page No.54 (Annexure-G), particularly in light of the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.5, Akola, in S.C.C. No.971/2021, within a period of seven working days from the date of receipt of this order. 8.

The petitioner undertakes to produce the copy of this order before respondent No.3.

9.

The decision taken thereupon shall be communicated to the petitioner within a period of three working days thereafter. 10.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. (RAJ D. WAKODE, J.) (ANIL S. KILOR, J.) Vijaykumar Signed by: Mr. Vijay Kumar Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 20/01/2026 19:04:20