Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court has dismissed a petition filed by a Hyderabad-based journalist seeking renewal of his passport. It ruled that passport renewal is not an automatic right and must strictly follow prescribed rules and regulations.
The petitioner, a 52-year-old resident of Bahadurpura, has previously worked with a daily newspaper and a television channel and is currently managing a news website along with social media platforms.
Passport based on intelligence report
According to a report published in TOI, his passport, first issued in 1998, was renewed in 2018 for a period of 10 years but was revoked within a year. He later approached the court seeking its renewal.
The revocation followed a report submitted by the state intelligence department. The report mentioned the petitioner’s alleged involvement in a criminal case registered in 1998.
According to the report, a pistol, 30 live cartridges, and a significant quantity of potassium chloride mixture were seized from him. The intelligence inputs also alleged his association with ISI operatives.
While the petitioner was acquitted in the criminal case, a confidential intelligence report submitted to the passport authorities stated that he was allegedly involved in activities that incited communal tensions between two communities during 2018 and 2019.
The report further mentioned that the special branch at the Shamshabad zone was maintaining a personal file on him to monitor his alleged unlawful activities.
Based on these inputs, the intelligence department recommended that no passport be issued to the petitioner, stating that his activities were prejudicial to the sovereignty and integrity of India. Acting on this recommendation, the passport authorities revoked his passport.
Petitioner’s argument
Before the High Court, the petitioner argued that the revocation was carried out without giving him an opportunity to be heard and claimed that the action violated the principles of natural justice.
He also sought suspension of the communication through which the police conveyed the reasons for recommending the revocation.
Disposing of the petition, Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka observed that the petitioner had not challenged the original order revoking his passport and had instead questioned a subsequent communication. On this ground alone, the court held that he was not entitled to any relief.
The judge further noted that although the petitioner filed a rejoinder denying the allegations, there was no specific denial regarding the concealment of the pistol, possession of ammunition and potassium chloride, or the alleged links with the ISI. The court emphasized that when an individual’s activities are under surveillance and are alleged to have implications for national security, courts are required to exercise greater caution.
Holding that no justification was made out to grant the relief sought, the court concluded that the principles of natural justice cannot be applied in situations involving public interest, national security, impracticality, and confidentiality.
