Militant’s Brother Cannot Be Denied Passport Without Valid Grounds: J&K HC; JKPC Supremo Sajad Lone Hails Development

Srinagar: The High Court of J&K and Ladakh on Tuesday said that there was no reason not to recommend the case of a person for issuing a passport just for the involvement of his brother in militancy activities.

Allowing a petition filed by one Mohammad Amir Malik, a bench of Justice M A Chowdhary directed Additional Director General of Police, CID to re-submit the report uninfluenced by the conduct or activities of the brother as well as Malik’s father to Regional Passport Officer (RPO) within four weeks.

The court asked the RPO to consider the case of the Malik, a resident of Ramban, on the report of ADGP CID and pass an appropriate order in Malik’s favour within two weeks thereafter.

Being a diploma holder in Engineering, Malik submitted that he desired to go abroad in search of good job as a career and as such had applied for issuance of a passport through on line process on 6 September 2021 and was informed that his case would be processed subsequent to CID/Police verification etc. However, the passport was not issued to him as such he approached the court.

The ADGP submitted to the court that passport verification report in respect of character and antecedents of Malik was got verified through field agencies which revealed that his brother remained a militant of Hizbul MUjahideen outfit who was killed during an encounter with security forces 2011 and that his father was enlisted as OGW in the records.

“While the protection of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution is available to a person, the said right cannot be claimed as a matter of right by a person who is an anarchist or a person attempting to destabilize the security and integrity of our State,” the court said, adding, “It is precisely for those reasons that the provisions of Section 6(2) sub-sections (a) to (i) have been incorporated in the Passports Act, 1967.”

The court said that the authorities would certainly be justified in not recommending Malik’s case for issuance of passport had there been any iota of allegation against him or his involvement in any subversive activities which could be deemed to be activities prejudicial to the security, sovereignty and integrity of the State.

“It should have been the activities of the petitioner (Malik) which should have formed the basis either for permitting or rejecting the request for issuance of passport in his favour,” the court said, adding, “The basis for not recommending the case of the petitioner (Malik) for issuance of passport does not have any reasonable relation or nexus with the activities of the petitioner (Malik) as the same do not even remotely connect the petitioner (Malik) with any activity which could be termed as prejudicial to the security, sovereignty and integrity of the State or the Country.”

The non-recommendation of Malik’s case, the court observed, is based upon material “which can be said to be nothing but in the realm of speculation.”

“The petitioner (Malik) cannot be deprived of his right as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution on the basis of the alleged misdemeanors of his brother,” the court said and directed the Additional Director General of Police, CID to re-submit the report uninfluenced by the conduct or activities of Malik’s brother as well as his father to the Regional Passport Officer within four weeks. The RPO, the court said, shall consider Malik’s case on the report of the ADGP and pass an appropriate order in Malik’s favour within two weeks thereafter.

Meanwhile, J&K Peoples Conference President and MLA Handwara, Sajad Lone, has lauded the judgment by the High Court of J&K and Ladakh.

Lone emphasized that this judgment sets a powerful precedent for thousands facing similar discrimination.

“I feel optimistic that a comprehensive ruling along these lines will soon be issued in response to our party’s petition,” he said.

He underscored that his party had already challenged the “growing misuse” of police verification as a tool for “collective punishment” through a petition filed by advocate Syed Sajad Geelani.

Welcoming the court’s decision, he reaffirmed that an individual’s rights must be determined solely by their own actions, not by the circumstances of their relatives.

“This should have happened much earlier, but better late than never. I am hopeful that this ruling will be extended across J&K and that our petition will be addressed at the earliest to ensure uniform application,” he stated.

Lone further stressed that their petition specifically called for the strict implementation of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Validation of Character and Antecedents) Instructions, 1997, along with subsequent amendments in the Government Order of 2021 and the Circular of 2024.

“These legal provisions mandate clear timelines for police verifications, ensuring a fair and transparent process,” he said.

He expressed confidence that the ruling would rectify systemic flaws and provide long-overdue relief, particularly to the youth of J&K, who have often been subjected to unwarranted restrictions.

“If the effect of this judgment is extended across J&K, it will help ensure that our youth are not unfairly penalized and that they are given the same opportunities as their peers in the rest of the country,” he stated. (With inputs from agencies)