Top Stories

Then there is no land to implement the passport alone, J&K HC is called. Bharat News

Srinagar: A cedar or pendency registration of an inquiry cannot be only to reject or deny or prevent its renewal, Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled, separated the order of a Jammu CBI court and rejected the petitions of a retired IAS officer for the release of their passport.HC said, “This is only on the entry of a charge sheet and the court has taken cognizance of the crime that it can be said that a criminal case is really pending,” HC said.The CBI had seized Sajad Ahmed Khan’s passport during the raid on October 12, 2021 on October 12, 2021 in connection with the investigation of illegal issuance of arms licenses. The agency also seized its mobile phone and land documents.Khan, who retired on 31 March 2018, appeared before the CBI in Chandigarh, where he cooperated in the investigation, but requested to return his passport.However, the Regional Passport Officer in Srinagar informed him on 3 February 2023 that his travel document was imposed under Section 10 (3) (C) of the Passport Act citing national security concerns.Khan filed an application before the CBI Special Court to release his passport, stating that he was a senior citizen and intended to go for the Haj pilgrimage. On September 11, 2024, the CBI court released other articles seized during the raid, but it is believed that the passport could not be issued.Khan challenged the order in HC, arguing that he was not involved in any Act for India’s security and his passport was held for more than three years without any charge.The CBI opposed the petition, saying that his role was “conspiracy to illegally issue arms licenses in view of monetary views”.The investigating agency said that it had sought approval for its prosecution by October 30, 2023, which was still awaited.HC said that the respondents had failed to place any material on the record to indicate that the petitioner’s passport had an impact in relation to J&K’s safety concerns and was necessary in the interest of the country’s security.The High Court, citing the Supreme Court’s decision, said that the right to travel abroad was an important human right, as it nurtured the independent and self -sufficient creative character of the person.

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button