SRINAGAR: Mere registration of an FIR or pendency of an investigation cannot be grounds to deny or impound a passport or withhold its renewal, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh high court ruled, setting aside a Jammu CBI court’s order rejecting a retired IAS officer’s plea for release of his passport.“It is only upon the filing of a chargesheet and the court taking cognisance of the offence that it may be said that a criminal case is actually pending,” the HC said.CBI had seized the passport of Sajad Ahmad Khan during a raid at his residence Oct 12, 2021, in connection with an investigation into the illegal issuance of arms licences. The agency also confiscated his mobile phones and land documents.Khan, who had retired on March 31, 2018, appeared before CBI in Chandigarh, where he cooperated with the investigation, but requested for the return of his passport.However, the regional passport officer in Srinagar informed him on Feb 3, 2023, that his travel document had been impounded under section 10(3)(c) of the Passports Act, citing national security concerns.Khan filed an application seeking release of his passport before the CBI special court, stating he was a senior citizen and intended to go for Hajj pilgrimage. On Sept 11, 2024, the CBI court released the other articles seized during the raid, but held that the passport could not be released.Khan challenged the order in HC, arguing that he was not involved in any act prejudicial to India’s security and that his passport had been held for over three years without any charges being filed.CBI opposed the plea, stating that his role had been established in the “conspiracy for issuance of arms licences illegally in view of the monetary considerations”.The probe agency said it had sought sanction for his prosecution as of Oct 30, 2023, which was still awaited.The HC said the respondents had failed to place any material on record to indicate that the impounding of the petitioner’s passport was with regard to the security concerns of J&K and that it was necessary in the interest of the country’s security.The right to travel abroad was an important human right, for it nourished the independent and self-determining creative character of the individual, the high court stated, citing a Supreme Court judgment.
