Srinagar, July 2: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has directed the Passport Authorities to reconsider the passport application of a 79-year-old man convicted in a case under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA), enabling him to undertake the Umrah pilgrimage, while emphasizing that the matter must be decided strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Passports Act, 1967.
The direction was issued by Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi while disposing of a writ petition filed by Ghulam Mohammad Dar, who had sought a direction to the authorities for processing his passport application submitted on January 24, 2024.
The petitioner informed the Court that despite more than two years having elapsed since filing the application, the Passport Authorities had failed to take a final decision, preventing him from undertaking the Umrah pilgrimage.
During the hearing, it was brought to the Court’s notice that the petitioner had earlier been acquitted in a Jammu and Kashmir case registered in 2002. However, he was later convicted by a Delhi trial court in a case under Sections 120-B, 121-A and 122 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 3 and 22 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA). While the trial court had sentenced him to life imprisonment, the Delhi High Court subsequently reduced the sentence to eight years.
The petitioner submitted that he completed the sentence and was released from prison in 2012. Having already served the sentence, he did not pursue any further appeal against the conviction.
Counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that Section 6(2)(e) of the Passports Act, 1967 permits refusal of a passport only if the applicant has, within five years immediately preceding the passport application, been convicted of an offence involving moral turpitude and sentenced to imprisonment for not less than two years. It was further submitted that no FIR or criminal case had been registered against the petitioner after his release from custody.
Representing the Union of India, Deputy Solicitor General T.M. Shamsi informed the Court that the passport application had already been processed and forwarded for police verification. However, the CID had recommended against issuance of the passport in view of the petitioner’s antecedents.
After hearing both sides, the High Court refrained from expressing any opinion on the merits of the case but directed the respondents to reconsider the petitioner’s application strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Passports Act, particularly Section 6(2)(e), after carrying out due verification and following the due process of law.
The Court clarified that the reconsideration should be undertaken solely for the purpose of enabling the petitioner to perform the Umrah or Hajj pilgrimage.
The High Court also directed the concerned authorities to complete the entire exercise and take an appropriate decision within four weeks from the date the copy of the order is made available to them.(KNC)
