Calcutta High Court Allows Quarry Owner Facing Explosives Act Trial To Renew Passport For 10 Years, Says Restrictions Must Be Reasonable

The Calcutta High Court has allowed a quarry owner facing trial in a case registered under the Explosive Substances Act to obtain a passport for a maximum period of 10 years, observing that any restriction imposed on the right to obtain a passport must be fair, just and reasonable and have a rational nexus with a legitimate purpose.

Justice Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee held that the Trial Court had failed to record any reason for leaving the period of passport issuance to the discretion of the Passport Authority.

The Court also noted that the Supreme Court had discouraged speculative apprehensions that an accused might misuse a passport.

The Court was hearing a criminal revision petition filed by R. Chidambaram challenging an order of the Trial Court which had granted no objection for renewal of his passport but left the period of issuance to the discretion of the Passport Authority.

The petitioner was facing trial in an FIR registered under Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Explosive Substances Act read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. He was accused of being involved, along with other quarry owners, in procuring explosives for quarrying activities without a valid licence.

The case was initiated in 2012 and, according to the petitioner, more than 78 witnesses had already been examined. However, the trial continued to remain pending.

In 2019, the petitioner had approached the High Court seeking expeditious disposal of the trial. The High Court had then directed the Trial Court to conclude the proceedings within one year. However, the direction remained uncomplied with.

During the pendency of the trial, the petitioner had approached the Trial Court in September 2021 seeking a no-objection certificate for obtaining a passport, as his existing passport was due to expire. The Trial Court had granted permission for obtaining a passport for a period of five years.

Subsequently, on August 5, 2026, the petitioner again approached the Trial Court seeking permission to renew his passport. By the impugned order, the Trial Court recorded that it had no objection to the petitioner obtaining a passport for a period as determined by the Passport Authority, subject to fulfilment of the requisite formalities.

Challenging this order, the petitioner relied on the Supreme Court's judgment in Mahesh Kumar Agarwal v. Union of India, reported as 2025 INSC 1476, particularly paragraphs 20 and 22.

He submitted that the Trial Court had failed to provide any justification for leaving the duration of the passport to the discretion of the Passport Authority. He also pointed out that the State had not raised any objection to his prayer before the Trial Court.

Opposing the revision petition, the State submitted that the trial was almost on the verge of completion and that the Trial Court was justified in leaving the question of the passport's validity to the Passport Authority.

Considering the submissions, the High Court observed that the Supreme Court, in Mahesh Kumar Agarwal, had reiterated that restrictions imposed in such circumstances must be fair, just and reasonable and must bear a rational nexus with a legitimate purpose.

The Court noted that the Trial Court had not recorded any reason for leaving the duration of the passport to the discretion of the Passport Authority and had effectively attempted to pass on its responsibility to the said authority.

It further observed that the Supreme Court had discouraged speculative apprehensions that an accused might misuse a passport.

Accordingly, the High Court modified the impugned order to the limited extent of allowing the petitioner's prayer for a no-objection certificate for obtaining a passport for a maximum period of 10 years, subject to compliance with all other conditions and formalities prescribed under the Passport Act.

The Court clarified that the other conditions imposed by the Trial Court while granting the no-objection were not interfered with.