Table of Contents
Introduction
Article 21 of the Constitution of India guarantees the Right to Life and Personal Liberty. Obtaining a passport including right to travel is a fundamental right covered under Article 21 of the Constitution. However, this right itself is not absolute and is subject to the regulations of the Passport Act,1967. And suppression or misrepresentation of material facts in the passport application is one of the most common grounds for refusal or revocation of the passport. This situation becomes even more challenging for Non-Resident Indians (NRIs), who often find themselves at a significant disadvantage due to their physical absence from India. Their ability to directly communicate with the passport authorities is limited, and they are largely dependent on the information and assistance provided by the Indian embassies or consulates in their country of residence. This reliance can lead to delays, miscommunication, and difficulties in responding promptly to notices or clarifications, making the process of rectifying such issues even more cumbersome for NRIs.
What constitutes suppression of material facts?
Material facts refer to information that is essential for the passport authority to determine your eligibility. The most common examples pertaining to the refusal of the passport for suppression of material facts may include(but not limited to):
- Criminal convictions or pending cases
- False name or identity
- Previous passport revocations
- False address or nationality
- Concealment of marital status in some contexts
Under Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act, 1967, the passport authority shall refuse to issue a passport if:
“proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant are pending before a criminal court in India;”
This amounts to suppression of material facts, and thus the passport authority can rightly refuse the grant of a passport to the applicant in the above scenario. The issue faced by NRIs in such situations is that many times an NRI is unaware of the legal proceedings that have been undertaken in India for any offence in which he or she has been arrayed as an accused. However, a passport cannot be refused merely on the ground that an investigation is pending in relation to an offence committed in India, or that an FIR has been registered, unless it is a case where the NRI is wilfully evading legal proceedings concerning the alleged offence.
The germane part here is the wilful concealment or misrepresentation of facts. In many cases, it has been observed that individuals enter the wrong marital status, and at the time of police inquiry, the passport application is either rejected or put on hold. Although time and again, courts have recognised that a passport cannot be rejected solely on the basis of an incorrect marital status entered in the application, this holds true unless it is proven that the misstatement was made wilfully to gain some undue advantage.
Unfortunately, police authorities often send negative reports in a mechanical manner to the concerned embassies. As a result, embassies tend to delay processing the applications indefinitely, leaving NRIs in a state of uncertainty. The situation is further compounded by the fact that NRIs are often unable to travel to India to resolve the issue or furnish the required documentation.
Under The Passports Act,1967 penalty for suppression/concelment of information under section 12(1)(b) of Passports Act, 1967 is as given below :
CLAUSE IV provides penalty for Minor suppressions/concealment of information regarding marital status/name of spouse etc. inadvertently as Rs.500.
Under the Passport Rules, the passport officials have been empowered to impose penalty in case a citizen does not provide full details or suppresses material information. But in many cases, the same is not exercised by the passport authorities, instead the application is outrightly rejected or kept pending.
Legal remedies if a passport is refused for suppression of material facts
- Filing of an Appeal under Section 11 of The Passports Act,1967
The appeal has to filed with the appellate authority within 30 days of the receiving of the “order of refusal”. In case no order of refusal is provided by the concerned embassy and the passport application is kept pending for a prolonged period and the only information being provided is that they haven’t received the necessary clearances from India then the NRI’s can send a Legal Representation regarding the same and further approach the Hon’ble High Court on the basis of the above representation.
- Filing of Writ Petition in the Hon’ble High Court
If the appeal is denied or the decision is delayed or put on hold for a prolonged time period, a Writ can be filed in the Hon’ble High Court of competent jurisdiction as the above act amounts to the violation of fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS
Dr. K.S. Dhawan v. Union of India & Others (2016, Punjab & Haryana HC)
In this case, the petitioner, a Non-Resident Indian (NRI), challenged the refusal of his passport renewal on the ground that he had not disclosed details of a pending criminal case in India. The court observed that the petitioner was residing abroad for several years and had not received any summons or notice in the criminal case.The High Court held that:
“The mere pendency of a criminal case, especially when the accused is unaware of it due to residing abroad, cannot be a ground to deny or revoke passport without giving an opportunity to be heard.”
The court directed the passport authority to renew the passport on humanitarian and legal grounds, emphasizing that NRIs must be given adequate opportunity and clarity before such punitive measures are taken.
This judgment reinforces the principle that passport authorities must act fairly and reasonably, particularly in cases involving NRIs who face unique communication and logistical barriers in engaging with Indian legal and administrative systems.
Kamaldeep Kaur v. Regional Passport Officer & Others
(Punjab & Haryana High Court)
In this case, Kamaldeep Kaur, the petitioner, had applied for a passport and mentioned her marital status as “unmarried”, despite being legally married at the time. Her husband later brought this to the notice of the Regional Passport Office, which issued a notice for suppression of material facts under Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act, 1967.The petitioner contended that she was living separately due to serious matrimonial disputes and had filed for divorce. The Passport Authority initiated proceedings to impound her passport, citing fraudulent declaration.
The High Court held:
“A passport application is a statutory declaration and any misstatement or omission regarding personal status—particularly marital status—is material under the law. However, in the absence of mala fide intent, authorities must proceed with sensitivity and give the applicant an opportunity to explain the circumstances.”
The court ultimately quashed the impounding order and directed the Passport Authority to reconsider the matter after granting the petitioner a personal hearing.
Karti P. Chidambaram v. Bureau of Immigration & Ors (2023, Delhi HC)
The Delhi High Court held that the right to travel abroad is part of personal liberty, and restrictions must be reasonable, fair, and proportionate. The court emphasized that suppression of facts must be proven to be intentional and material to justify refusal.
Abdul Samad v. Union of India (2022, Kerala HC)
The Kerala High Court ruled that non-disclosure of a criminal case that resulted in acquittal does not constitute a valid ground for passport denial, especially if the information was omitted unintentionally.
Deepak Mishra v. Union of India (2021, MP HC)
The Madhya Pradesh High Court directed the passport authority to reconsider the application, where the petitioner failed to disclose a compoundable offence from years ago, holding that the right to livelihood and foreign employment opportunities must also be considered.
Conclusion
Although suppression of material facts is a serious issue that can lead to passport denial or revocation but time and again various courts have reiterated that every refusal must stand the test of legality, reasonableness, and proportionality. If you’re facing passport denial or revocation, consult a legal expert immediately and exercise your right to appeal or judicial review. A carefully presented explanation and timely legal action can often reverse the decision.