Calcutta High Court allows quarry owner facing Explosives Act trial to renew passport for 10 years, citing reasonable restrictions

KanoonHQ Legal Gazette · AI-generated brief from the source linked below. How briefs are made

Published 2 November 2026

Case: Not stated in source
Court: Calcutta High Court
Bench: Justice Bibek Chaudhuri
Citation: Not stated in source
Statutes: Explosives Act, 1884
Passport Act, 1967
Source: LiveLaw

Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF)

The Calcutta High Court, in a decision by Justice Bibek Chaudhuri, allowed a quarry owner facing trial under the Explosives Act to renew his passport for 10 years. The Court held that restrictions on passport renewal must be reasonable and cannot be imposed indefinitely, especially when the trial is pending.

Ratio Decidendi · Legal Principle Established

Restrictions on passport renewal for individuals facing criminal trials must be reasonable and proportionate, and cannot be imposed indefinitely, particularly when the trial is pending and not yet concluded. The Passport Act, 1967, allows for renewal even when a criminal case is pending, subject to court permission.

Practice & Procedural Impact for Advocates

Advocates should argue for reasonable restrictions on passport renewal, emphasizing the right to travel and the indefinite nature of trial proceedings. Litigants facing criminal trials can seek court permission for full 10-year passport renewals, rather than shorter periods, by demonstrating no flight risk.

Key Legal Takeaways

1Passport renewal for individuals facing criminal trials is permissible with court permission.
2Restrictions on passport validity must be reasonable and cannot be indefinite.
3The court can grant a 10-year passport renewal even if a criminal trial is pending.

The Legal Issue An individual, a quarry owner, was facing a criminal trial under the Explosives Act, 1884. Due to the pending trial, his passport renewal was restricted, and he was only granted a one-year renewal. He sought a full 10-year renewal, arguing that the indefinite restriction was unreasonable and infringed upon his right to travel.

Court's Reasoning The Calcutta High Court, through Justice Bibek Chaudhuri, observed that while the Passport Act, 1967, allows for restrictions on passport issuance or renewal for individuals facing criminal proceedings, such restrictions must be reasonable. The Court noted that the trial under the Explosives Act had been pending for a considerable period and was not likely to conclude soon. Indefinitely restricting the passport validity to one year was deemed unreasonable, especially when there was no indication that the petitioner was a flight risk. The Court emphasized that the right to travel, though not absolute, could not be curtailed indefinitely on the mere pendency of a trial. Therefore, the Court found it appropriate to allow the renewal of the passport for the standard period of 10 years.

What Follows The Calcutta High Court directed the passport authorities to renew the petitioner's passport for a period of 10 years. This decision allows the quarry owner to obtain a full-term passport despite the ongoing criminal trial under the Explosives Act.