New Delhi, February 27 The right to possess a passport and travel abroad is an integral aspect of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the Delhi High Court has said.
When any action by the authorities infringes upon such a right, the court asserted, it must be reasonable and conform to the principles of natural justice.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav passed the order while setting aside the Centre's decision to seize the passport of Yogesh Raheja, the former Director of Raheja Developers, for failing to disclose the pendency of an FIR against him when applying for renewal.
The order confiscating the petitioner's passport was passed by the authorities on January 17, 2025, and his appeal against the decision was rejected by the appellate authority on March 25, 2025.
The petitioner's counsel stated that, according to a 2019 office memorandum by the Ministry of External Affairs, the mere registration of an FIR does not constitute the pendency of criminal proceedings for the issuance of a passport unless a court of competent jurisdiction has taken cognizance of the offense.
The court observed that the reasons given by the authorities to confiscate the petitioner's passport did not withstand legal scrutiny, as he had applied for renewal of his passport in October 2024, and cognizance was only taken in February 2025, a month after the confiscation order.
"The right to possess a passport and to travel abroad is an integral aspect of the right to personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It follows that any state action infringing upon the right to possess a passport must satisfy the test of reasonableness and must conform to the principles of natural justice," the court said.
"It is evident that the decision passed by the respondents cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the orders dated 17.01.2025 and 25.03.2025 stand set aside," the court concluded.
The petitioner was represented by Sandeep Kapur, a senior partner at law firm Karanjawala & Co.
