Chandigarh, May 17, 2022: While dealing with a petition wherein the petitioner sought the Court’s indulgence in processing his application for re-issuance of his passport which was kept at abeyance owing to the pendency of his appeal against the order of his conviction, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has expressed its disagreement with the contention of the petitioner’s counsel to the effect that a constitutional Court has the power to direct issuance/re-issuance of a passport even in a case where an appeal against conviction is pending.
In the instant case, the Bench of Justice Sudhir Mittal was dealing with an application for re-issuance of the passport of the petitioner which was not being processed because the petitioner’s appeal against conviction was pending.
In order to contend that notwithstanding such pendency of the appeal proceedings, the Counsel for the petitioner relied upon judgment dated September 27, 2021, passed in Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu vs. Central Bureau of Investigation to submit that a constitutional Court has the power to direct issuance/re-issuance of a passport even in a case where an appeal against conviction is pending.
After considering the case at hand, the Court observed at the very outset that the above-stated argument was misconceived. Contrary to what was contended, the High Court was of the view that the judgment in Vengala Kasturi Rangacharyulu (supra) was passed in the appeal pending in the Supreme Court.
Further, the Court noted that the above-cited decision did not lay down any proposition that despite the pendency of the appeal against conviction, the constitutional Courts would independently exercise jurisdiction in matters regarding issuance/re-issuance of passports.
Faced with this situation, the counsel for the petitioner expressed his wish to withdraw this petition with liberty to approach the concerned Court where his appeal was pending.