Re-Issue Of Passport On Being Lost Cannot Be Done Without Registering FIR With Police: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday rejected a petition seeking direction to Regional Passport officer to re-issue petitioner's passport on him having lost the passport, without him registering a First Information Report with the police as is prescribed under the rules framed under the Passport Act.

A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit while dismissing the petition of one Sridhar Kulkarni A said,

“Right to travel abroad is a Fundamental right is true but it is regulated by the Passport Act and rules framed thereunder. If rules prescribe a procedure, one has to follow the same by making appropriate application along with the requisite documents."

Section 24 of the Passport Act empowers the Central Government to make rules for carrying out the purposes of the Act, including the issue of a duplicate passport or travel document in lieu of a passport or travel document lost, damaged or destroyed.

Schedule V to Passport Rules 1980 prescribe that the holder of a passport or travel document is personally responsible for its safe custody. It must not be wilfully lost, damaged or destroyed. In case of an unintentional loss or destruction, the fact and circumstances of such loss or destruction should be immediately reported to the nearest passport authority in India or (if the holder of the passport is abroad) to the nearest Indian Mission or Post and to the local police.

Similarly, Annexure F to the Rules stipulates declaration of applicant for obtaining passport in lieu of lost/ damaged passport. It requires the applicant to state how and when the passport was lost/damaged and when FIR was lodged at which Police Station and how many passports were lost/damaged earlier.

The petitioner happens to be an accused in the offence registered against him by his spouse. He argued that the Right to Travel is recognised as a part of Article 21 of the Constitution in the light of Supreme Court's decision in Menaka Gandhi vs Union of India (1978) and thus, there is a duty cast on the Regional passport officer to issue a fresh passport where one is lost.

Further he relied on the Magistrate court order which permitted him to travel abroad.

Deputy Solicitor General Shanthi Bhushan H appearing for the Union opposed the plea saying though Right to travel abroad is recognised as a Fundamental right, it is regulated by the provisions of the Passport Act, 1967. "It is not that the passport was not given to the petitioner but he has lost the same and is now seeking for a renewed (re-issue) passport,” Bhushan contended. He added that under Section 17 of the Act, a passport is the property of the Central Government.

The Court on hearing the parties and perusing the record declined indulgence in the matter saying, “The case is not of the issuance of passport but issuance of renewed (re-issue) passport on the one being lost. Passport rules prescribes the format of documents to accompany the passport application even for the issuance of renewed (re-issue). Such an application has not been filed along with required documents.”

Further it said, “The order of learned magistrate permitting the petitioner to travel abroad does not come much to aid of petitioner in as much as such a travel has to be preceded by the grant of passport or renewed passport as the case may be.”

Accordingly it dismissed the petition saying, “However, if the petitioner makes an appropriate application accompanied by requisite documents and fees the same shall be considered by respondents RPO, expeditiously and in accordance with law.”

Case Title: Sridhar Kulkarni A And Union of India & ANR

Case No: WP 9248/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 251

Date of Order: 04-07-2023

Appearance: Advocate Kiran N for petitioner

DSG Shanthi Bhushan H