The Telangana High Court on Friday rejected a US-based software engineer’s plea for a standard 10-year passport renewal and directed her to seek a longer-term passport from the criminal court where her case is being heard. The court affirmed that rules restricting validity for those with pending criminal cases are “neither arbitrary nor unreasonable”.
A division bench of Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G M Mohiuddin ordered the petitioner, Nidhi Agarwal, to immediately approach the criminal court for permission to get a longer-validity passport. The petitioner’s current passport expires in January 2026 and renewal is restricted to one year because she is Accused No. 6 (absconding) in a pending dowry case before a city criminal court.
The deputy solicitor general of India, representing the passport authority, argued that the petitioner falls under Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967, which permits refusal of a passport due to pending criminal proceedings. Moreover, the accompanying statutory rule (GSR 570(E) of August 1993) dictates that in such cases, the passport can only be issued for a short validity of one year, or for a specific period if ordered by the criminal court.
‘Adverse consequences and loss of employment’
The petitioner’s counsel, T Sharath, argued that the one-year restriction was untenable since Agarwal was allegedly in the US during the entire period of the offence. He contended that limiting the passport duration would cause “serious, adverse consequences and loss of employment” since she was on an H-1B visa and was therefore “unreasonable, discriminatory and offending Article 14 of the Constitution of India”.
Opposing the plea, the deputy solicitor general of India submitted that GSR 570(E) itself provides an avenue for the applicant to seek a longer validity period by obtaining an order from the criminal court.
Upholding the notification, the high court observed that the rule provides “enough flexibility to take into account the criminal cases of different nature and also the facts and circumstances attached with the particular accused/applicant seeking renewal of passport”. The bench conclusively ruled: “We are of the view that the impugned clause under GSR 570(E) dated 25.08.1993 is neither arbitrary nor suffers from the vice of unreasonable classification.”
Due to the impending expiry, the court directed the petitioner to approach the XVII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in Nampally, Hyderabad, by December 15, 2025, for a no-objection certificate. The magistrate was instructed to hear the application and “pass such orders as may be required in accordance with law within a period of ten days thereafter”. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.
© The Indian Express Pvt Ltd
