Passport travel exemption for accused facing prosecution allowed when High Court permits departure and proceedings are stayed.

A person facing pending criminal prosecution may be permitted to retain a passport and travel abroad where the High Court has admitted the quash petition and stayed further proceedings. The expression "concerned Court" in the exemption notification was treated as the High Court, and the power under Section 5(2)(c) of the Passports Act, 1967 was read subject to Section 6(2). The notification under Section 22(a) was taken to permit exemption from the bar in clause (f) when the court allows departure from India. On those facts, the petitioner was directed to give the required undertaking and was allowed to travel abroad with the passport retained by him.

---

---

Issues: Whether a person facing pending criminal prosecution could be permitted to retain the passport and travel abroad, and whether the passport authority was bound to exempt him from the bar under the Passports Act.

Analysis: The petitioner's criminal case was pending, but the High Court had already admitted the quash petition and stayed further proceedings. In that setting, the expression "concerned Court" in the exemption notification was treated as the High Court. The power under Section 5(2)(c) of the Passports Act, 1967 was read subject to Section 6(2), and the notification issued under Section 22(a) enabled exemption from the bar under clause (f) where the court permitted departure from India. On the facts, the dispute was treated as one fit for permission to travel abroad, and the petitioner was directed to give the required undertaking.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to go abroad, the passport authorities were directed to exempt him from Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967, and he was allowed to keep the passport with him.

---