J&K&L High Court Directs Passport Authority to Decide Application
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has issued a directive to the passport authorities, instructing them to decide the application for a passport submitted by a 78-year-old individual. The court's order comes despite a police verification report that cited the applicant's alleged involvement in a First Information Report (FIR) registered in 1988. The bench, presided over by Justice Rajnesh Oswal, clarified that the mere existence of an old FIR, without a pending charge sheet in a competent court, cannot serve as a basis for refusing a passport.
The petitioner, Mohammad Ramzan Wani, aged 78 years, had approached the High Court seeking a mandate for the issuance of his passport. His application had previously faced rejection due to adverse remarks contained within a police verification report dated 26th December 2022. Subsequently, Mr. Wani submitted another online application, which was returned with an endorsement stating, "Police verification report is not clear and the application is under review at Regional Passport Office." This prompted the filing of the writ petition before the High Court.
Court's Inquiry and Findings
During the proceedings, the High Court, through an order dated 27th August 2026, had sought a detailed report from the 3rd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srinagar. This report was crucial to ascertain the current status of the FIR referenced in the police verification. Pursuant to this judicial directive, the 3rd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srinagar, furnished a report to the High Court.
The report unequivocally disclosed that no case arising from FIR No. 111/88 of Police Station, Safa Kadal, was pending before the concerned court. This finding was central to the High Court's subsequent observations and directions. Justice Oswal, upon reviewing this report, noted that it was evident no charge sheet stemming from FIR No. 111/1988 was pending before any court.
Legal Rationale and Disposition
Based on the findings from the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Srinagar, the High Court articulated its legal position. Justice Oswal observed that once it is established that no charge sheet arising from the FIR is pending before a court, the passport authorities (respondent No. 1 and 3) are precluded from refusing to issue a passport to the petitioner solely on the basis of the verification report. The court held that the adverse remarks in the police verification report, pertaining to the petitioner's involvement in FIR No. 111/1988, could not be a valid ground for denial in the absence of a pending judicial proceeding.
Consequently, the High Court disposed of the writ petition, issuing a clear direction to the respondents. The passport authorities were mandated to decide Mr. Wani's application for the issuance of a passport, notwithstanding the police verification report concerning the 1988 FIR. This directive is contingent on there being no other legal impediment to the issuance of the passport. The court expressed confidence that the respondent authorities would pass appropriate orders within a period of three months from the date a certified copy of the order is made available to them.
The case was titled Mohammad Ramzan Wani v. Union of India and Others. Mr. Saqib Shabir, Advocate, appeared for the petitioner, while Ms. Shagfuta Maqbool, Advocate, represented the respondents on behalf of Mr. T M Shamshi, DSGI, and Mr. Shahbaz Sikander, AAG, on behalf of Mr. Mohsin Qadiri, Sr. AAG.