Archive · 6 Aug 2026
Calcutta High Court Rules Courts Decide Travel, Not Passport Validity
A man in India is accused in a corruption case.
He gave his passport to the court as he was told to do.
His passport was about to expire, so he asked the court to let him renew it.
The passport office said he needed a special court order saying how long his new passport should be valid.
A big court in Calcutta called the high court looked at the case.
The judge said a passport is just a civil document, like an ID card for travel.
He said criminal courts decide if someone on trial can leave the country.
He also said courts do not decide how long a passport should be valid.
The judge ordered the passport office to renew the man's passport for 10 years, the normal time.
The man still cannot travel abroad without the trial court's permission.
He must also give his passport back to the court within five days after getting it renewed.
The Calcutta High Court ruled that criminal courts decide if an accused can travel abroad, not how long a passport remains valid.
Justice Krishna Rao termed the passport a 'civil document' and ordered authorities to renew it for the standard 10-year period.
The accused, facing a corruption case before a trial court in Ranchi, had deposited his passport under a Supreme Court order.
Passport authorities had insisted on a court order specifying the validity period, citing a 1993 notification permitting one-year validity.
The high court directed renewal within three weeks and ordered the man to surrender the passport within five days of renewal.
- Who
- Justice Krishna Rao of the Calcutta High Court and a man accused in a corruption case before a trial court in Ranchi.
- What
- The court ruled that criminal courts decide travel permission, not the duration of passport validity, and ordered the accused's passport renewed for 10 years.
- When
- Order passed on 5 August; the accused's plea was filed on 17 September 2025 and his passport renewal application on 17 October 2025.
- Where
- Calcutta High Court; the underlying case is before a trial court in Ranchi.
- Why
- Because passport authorities insisted on a court order specifying the passport's validity period, which the high court said the law and rules do not require.
Accused's Counsel
Passport Authorities
Passport renewal validity period
Accused's Counsel
The man's counsel argued authorities wrongly denied a regular 10-year passport and could not act as an 'appellate authority' by adding conditions beyond the trial court's order.
Passport Authorities
Authorities maintained the trial court order specified no validity period and cited a 1993 notification permitting a passport with one-year validity.
- Court
- Calcutta High Court
- Judge
- Justice Krishna Rao
- Order date
- 5 August
- Accused's case
- Corruption case before a trial court in Ranchi
- Passport renewal directed
- 10 years, within three weeks of receiving judgment
- Plea before trial court
- 17 September 2025
- Trial court released passport
- 9 October 2025
- Renewal application
- 17 October 2025
- Authority's communication
- 3 November 2025, citing a 1993 notification for one-year validity