J&K High Court: Passport Can’t Be Denied for Relative’s Crimes

Srinagar: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has ruled that an individual cannot be denied a passport solely on the grounds of a family member’s past involvement in terrorism.

The verdict was delivered in the case of Mohammad Amir Malik, a 29-year-old engineering graduate from Shagan village in Ramban, who was denied a passport due to his brother’s terror background and his father’s alleged role as an overground worker (OGW) for a terror outfit.

Justice M.A. Chowdhary, while issuing the ruling, stated, “Merely because the petitioner’s brother was a terrorist and his father is an OGW, he cannot be deprived of his fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.”

Malik had applied for a passport in September 2021 to pursue overseas job opportunities but faced persistent delays. Authorities informed him that his application was under police scrutiny. In June 2022, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) and the Regional Passport Office (RPO) cited an adverse police verification report, marking him as “not cleared” and suggesting he “may likely misuse the passport,”.

Instead of responding to a show-cause notice issued in August 2022, Malik approached the High Court, challenging the rejection. The government argued that he could be vulnerable to “duress, influence, or extraneous pressure from anti-India terrorist or separatist groups”.

However, the court found no allegations or evidence against Malik himself linking him to any subversive activities. “It should have been the activities of the petitioner that formed the basis for permitting or rejecting the issuance of a passport,” the judgment noted.

Calling the authorities’ stance speculative, the court ruled that denying an individual a passport based on a relative’s past actions was legally impermissible. It directed the Additional Director General of Police (CID) to submit a fresh verification report within four weeks, after which the RPO must decide within two weeks, uninfluenced by Malik’s family history.

The ruling has garnered widespread attention, with legal experts and civil society members welcoming the decision. A

One of the constitutional law expert while wishing anonymity , termed the verdict a “significant step in upholding fundamental rights.”

Local residents also praised the judgment. “Why should a son be punished for his brother’s past? This verdict restores faith in justice,” said Tariq Hussain, a businessman from Lal chowk Srinagar.

In a related development, in January current year, Jammu and Kashmir People’s Conference (JKPC) chief Sajad Lone has filed a public interest litigation (PIL) in the High Court, challenging the alleged misuse of the police verification process. The PIL, submitted through Advocate Syed Sajad Geelani, seeks to prevent authorities from using family background as a basis for denying passports, government jobs, and other essential rights.

“The current system has been used as a tool of collective punishment, targeting individuals based on the actions of their relatives. This must end,” Lone  said.

The petition calls for strict enforcement of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Validation of Character and Antecedents) Instructions, 1997, and amendments introduced through government orders in 2021 and 2024, which mandate clear timelines for police verifications.

“When police verifications are based on irrelevant factors, it not only violates rights but subject’s individuals to undue hardships, which is both ethically and constitutionally unjustified,” Lone added. Citing the Supreme Court’s “Bulldozer Judgment,” he emphasized that collective punishment must not be permitted.

Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has also advocated for reforms in the police verification process. Stressing the need for expediting verification for passports and government jobs, Abdullah said, “A terrorist’s son is not a terrorist. We cannot deny passports or NOCs to those whose relatives were once affiliated with terrorism.”

Though acknowledging that the matter is not within his direct control under the current governance system, Abdullah added he had taken up the issue with concerned authorities, including the CID chief, to ease the verification formalities.

Legal analysts believe the High Court’s ruling in Malik’s case could set a precedent for similar cases where individuals face restrictions due to their family’s past. With growing calls for transparency and fairness in police verification processes, the verdict is seen as a significant step toward ensuring that fundamental rights are upheld in Jammu and Kashmir.

As the government reassesses Malik’s application, many in the Valley hope the decision will prevent similar instances of passport denials in the future.