ORDER : 1. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to forthwith return the passport bearing No. M8213324 to the petitioner which was issued in his favour on 06.08.2015 having expiry date as 05.08.2025 and was surrendered at Regional Passport Office, Ranchi on 05.11.2015. Further prayer has been made for quashing the order dated 21.07.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge - XVI, Dhanbad in S.T. No. 443 of 2012, whereby an application filed by the petitioner seeking ‘no objection’ for renewal of his passport has been rejected. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was issued passport bearing No. A4200711 on 11.11.1997 having expiry date as 10.11.2017, however, the said passport subsequently got damaged which was informed by him to the respondent no. 1. The petitioner applied online for issuance of fresh passport and a new passport bearing No. M8213324 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Passport”) was issued to him on 06.08.2015 having expiry date as 05.08.2025. However, the petitioner was asked by the respondent no. 1 to surrender the said passport and as such he surrendered the same on 05.11.2015 in the Regional Passport Office, Ranchi. Thereafter, letter dated 05.02.2016 was issued to the petitioner by the respondent no. 1 asking him to clarify as to whether a criminal case was registered against him which was still under trial as informed by the concerned police authorities and he was directed to produce final judgment of the said case, if any. It was also alleged that the petitioner fraudulently obtained new passport giving fake name and other personal particulars despite having possessed an old one. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 25.02.2016 mentioning that he was already on bail in the case being Dhanbad (Bank More) P.S. Case No. 342/2011 and the said case was pending for trial. It was also explained that he was having no other passport at that time except the one issued to him recently. The criminal case lodged against him was relating to a public agitation since at the relevant time, his father was the M.L.A. of Dhanbad. In the said case, chargesheet against the accused persons including the petitioner was submitted, however, further proceeding of the case in connection with Sessions Trial No. 443 of 2012 was stayed vide order dated 28.11.2016 passed by a Bench of this Court in Cr. In the said case, chargesheet against the accused persons including the petitioner was submitted, however, further proceeding of the case in connection with Sessions Trial No. 443 of 2012 was stayed vide order dated 28.11.2016 passed by a Bench of this Court in Cr. Revision No. 1239 of 2016 and as such the charge was not framed against him. During pendency of the present writ petition, an application dated 13.05.2020 filed by the petitioner seeking ‘no objection’ from the trial court i.e., the court of Additional Sessions Judge-XVI, Dhanbad for renewal of the passport in his favour was rejected vide impugned order dated 21.07.2022. 3. It is further submitted that pendency of the criminal case cannot be a ground for non-issuance of the passport or recalling it after its issuance. The respondent no. 1 has no valid reason to withhold the passport of the petitioner. The respondent no. 1 has not followed the notification issued vide GSR 570(E) dated 25.08.1993 by the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India under Section 22 (a) of the Passports Act, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 1967”) wherein exemption from the operation of the provisions of clause (f) of sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Act, 1967 to such citizens of India against whom proceedings in respect of an alleged offence are pending before a criminal court, has been provided. 4. Learned ASGI appearing on behalf of the respondent- Union of India submits that the petitioner was granted a passport bearing no. A4200711 by the Regional Passport Office, Patna on 11.11.1997 and he applied for re-issuance of the said passport on 06.08.2015 as his old passport was hand written, which was no more valid as per the International Civil Aviation Organization guideline. The petitioner made a solemn declaration in the application dated 06.08.2015 that he was not charged in any criminal case in any court of law in India and in view of the said declaration, a passport being No. M8213324 was issued to him on 06.08.2015 on post police verification basis. 5. It is also submitted that the Passport Authority, in exercise of his statuary obligation, initiated an enquiry in the form of police verification whereafter a criminal case was found pending against the petitioner. 5. It is also submitted that the Passport Authority, in exercise of his statuary obligation, initiated an enquiry in the form of police verification whereafter a criminal case was found pending against the petitioner. A show cause notice was then issued to the petitioner on 16.10.2015 whereupon he appeared on 05.11.2015 and surrendered his passport issued on 06.08.2015 as well as requested for re-enquiry. Accordingly, a re-enquiry was ordered and the Superintendent of Police, Dhanbad submitted his enquiry/police verification report on 04.02.2016 reiterating the fact that there was a criminal case pending against him. A show cause notice dated 05.02.2016 was again issued to the petitioner asking him to clarify his position. The petitioner replied the said show cause notice and thereafter the S.P., Dhanbad was once again requested to send his enquiry report afresh who sent his report on 07.04.2016 again recommending not to issue passport facilities to the petitioner due to the reason that a criminal case was pending against him and as such, the case regarding restoration of passport to the petitioner was technically closed by the respondent no. 1 on account of adverse police verification report against him following the procedure provided in the Act, 1967 and the Passport Rules, 1980 as amended from time to time. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. The primary argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is that pendency of criminal case against the applicant is not a bar in issuing passport to any person. It is further argued that while rejecting the application of the petitioner for grant of NOC for renewal of the said passport, the trial court totally ignored the guidelines as contained in Office Memorandum No. VI/401/1/5/ 2019 dated 10.10.2019 issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India (PSP Division) with respect to the matter of issuance of passports to such applicants against whom criminal cases are pending before a court of law in India. 7. Section 5 of the Act, 1967 provides for filing of applications for passports, travel documents etc. as well as for issuance or refusal to issue the same by the passport authority to the concerned applicant by recording reasons in brief for making such order. Section 6 contains the grounds on which the passport authority may refuse to grant the passport/travel document. as well as for issuance or refusal to issue the same by the passport authority to the concerned applicant by recording reasons in brief for making such order. Section 6 contains the grounds on which the passport authority may refuse to grant the passport/travel document. In view of Section 6(2)(f) of the Act, 1967, the issuance of passport may be refused when proceeding in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant is pending before a criminal court in India. Thus, as per the said provision, the pendency of criminal cases may be a ground for refusal to grant passport to the concerned applicant. 8. However, on perusal of Office Memorandum No. VI/401/1/5/ 2019 issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India (PSP Division), it appears that earlier a notification vide GSR 570(E) dated 25.08.1993 was issued regarding issuance of passports to applicants against whom criminal proceedings were pending and whose applications would attract the provisions of clause (f) of sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Passports Act, 1967. While issuing the Notification vide GSR 570(E), the Central Government thought it necessary in public interest to exempt such citizens of India from the operation of the provisions of Section 6(2)(f) of the Act, 1967 against whom proceedings in respect of the offences alleged to have been committed by them are pending before criminal courts in India and who produce orders from the court concerned permitting them to depart from India. However, the said passport has to be issued to every such citizen who may need to travel abroad for some urgent business and for the period specified in order of the court or if no period is specified in such order, the passport has to be issued for a period of one year which can further be renewed for one year at a time, provided that the applicant has not travelled abroad for the period sanctioned by the court; and that in the meantime, the order of the court is not cancelled or modified. Such passport can further be renewed only on the basis of a fresh order of the court specifying a further period of validity of the passport or specifying a period for travelling abroad. 9. Such passport can further be renewed only on the basis of a fresh order of the court specifying a further period of validity of the passport or specifying a period for travelling abroad. 9. Instructions/guidelines issued vide Office Memorandum dated 10.10.2019 are to be adopted by all passport issuing authorities in India and abroad while processing such applications in respect of those applicants who may have criminal proceedings pending before criminal courts in India. It has been provided that after getting NOC from the Court of Law, the applicant has to file undertaking as per the provisions of GSR 570(E) dated 25.08.1993 which should be complete in all respects and should mention all the criminal cases pending against him. The undertaking will have a note clearly stating that if any false or incomplete information is submitted by an applicant, his passport application is liable to be rejected. Thereafter, the police verification shall be made and if the undertaking is found incomplete or misleading suppressing the details of other criminal cases pending against him, a show cause notice shall be issued to him and action will be initiated against him as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Passports Act, 1967. 10. If an applicant has obtained a passport by making a false submission or by suppressing material facts and it comes to light after issuance of the passport, the passport may be impounded or revoked as per provision of Section 10(3)(b) of the Passports Act, 1967, after following due procedure. It is further provided that where the first Police Verification is ‘Adverse’, secondary police verification may be generated. Apart from generating secondary Police Verification Report (PVR), the passport officers may, if considers necessary, call for discreet enquiry through the police authorities by sending the court order submitted by the applicant or even seek verification from other government agencies/departments, as the case may be. If the secondary Police Verification is also ‘Adverse’, it will be examined whether the details brought out in the police verification report match the undertaking submitted by the applicant. If the details given in the police verification report and the undertaking submitted by the applicant are matching, then ‘No Objection Certificate’ issued by a Court of law and submitted by the applicant will take precedence over any ‘Adverse’ report submitted by the police. If the details given in the police verification report and the undertaking submitted by the applicant are matching, then ‘No Objection Certificate’ issued by a Court of law and submitted by the applicant will take precedence over any ‘Adverse’ report submitted by the police. In such cases, the ‘Adverse’ report may be overruled with the written approval of the Passport Officer. If the details given in the police verification report and the undertaking submitted by the applicant are at variance, then a notice may be issued to the applicant calling for clarification and advising the applicant to submit details of all pending criminal cases as well as to submit a revised ‘No Objection Certificate’ (NOC). If it is brought to the notice of the passport authority that an applicant has been arrayed in criminal proceedings before several courts of law, then he may be advised to get NOC from all the concerned court(s). 11. It thus appears that in spite of restriction imposed under the provisions of Section 6(2)(f) of the Act, 1967, the Government of India vide GSR 570(E) dated 25.08.1993 and office memorandum dated 10.10.2019 has laid a procedure for issuance of passport to such applicants against whom criminal cases are pending before court of law in India and the passport can only be issued after grant of NOC from the court of law where the criminal case of the applicant is pending subject to the conditions laid down in the said Notification dated 25.08.1993 and Office Memorandum dated 10.10.2019. 12. Admittedly, there is a criminal case pending against the petitioner. Though the present writ petition was initially filed for return of the said passport in favour of the petitioner, however, during pendency of the present case, he filed an application for issuance of NOC before the Additional Sessions Judge-XVI, Dhanbad for renewal of his passport. The trial court, however, rejected the said application treating the same as not maintainable and observing that renewal of passport is an issue between the applicant and passport authority and the court conducting a trial has no role to play at the time of issuance or renewal of the same. 13. The trial court, however, rejected the said application treating the same as not maintainable and observing that renewal of passport is an issue between the applicant and passport authority and the court conducting a trial has no role to play at the time of issuance or renewal of the same. 13. On bare perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the trial court did not enter into the merit of the claim of the petitioner ignoring the guidelines issued vide Notification dated 25.08.1993 and the Office Memorandum dated 10.10.2019 while disposing of the application. The observation made by the trial court is contrary to the Notification of Government of India issued vide GSR 570(E) dated 25.08.1993 and Office Memorandum dated 10.10.2019 which empowers the trial court to issue NOC to any under trial accused subject to the conditions laid down in the said notifications. 14. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the impugned order dated 21.07.2022 passed in S.T. No. 443 of 2012 is hereby set-aside. The petitioner is at liberty to file a fresh application seeking NOC before the trial court with respect to issuance of passport/renewal of passport, which shall be disposed of in accordance with law keeping in view the GSR 570(E) dated 25.08.1993 and Office Memorandum dated 10.10.2019 issued by the Government of India. If the court grants NOC to the petitioner, he may file an application for issuance of passport/renewal of passport before the respondent no. 1 which shall be dealt with by the said respondent in accordance with law. 15. The writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid observation.