Allahabad HC Orders Passport NOC for Dancer Sapna Choudhary, Affirms Right to Travel
Court rules no travel restrictions exist in bail order, directs trial court to issue No Objection Certificate for passport renewal
LUCKNOW: The Allahabad High Court has set aside a lower court’s refusal to grant a No Objection Certificate (NOC) to popular dancer and actor Sapna Choudhary for passport renewal, emphasizing that liberty is not a gift of the State but its first obligation.
Justice Pankaj Bhatia, presiding over the Lucknow Bench, allowed Choudhary’s application filed under Section 482 CrPC and directed the trial court to issue the NOC, observing that her bail order in a pending criminal case imposed no restrictions on foreign travel.
The case stems from a 2018 FIR registered under Sections 406 and 420 IPC related to the alleged cancellation of a show in Lucknow. While Choudhary was granted bail in the matter, the court had not imposed any condition preventing her from leaving the country.
Last June, a lower court rejected Choudhary’s NOC request, citing the absence of documents specifying her travel period, destination country, or purpose. However, the High Court found this reasoning insufficient.
“Merely because no documents have been filed, the request for travel abroad cannot be denied as has been done in the impugned order,” Justice Bhatia observed in the order passed on January 7.
The court noted that no material exists to suggest Choudhary would be a flight risk. It also highlighted that she has two children and substantial property in India, indicating strong ties to the country.
Choudhary’s counsel argued that the denial violated her constitutional rights under Article 21, including the right to travel abroad and earn a livelihood. The defense pointed out that international show organizers often require performers to hold valid passports, and it may not always be possible to furnish travel documents in advance.
The Union of India’s counsel contended there is no independent right to passport renewal and that such rights are subject to restrictions under Section 6(2) of the Passports Act.
The High Court distinguished between the issuance of a passport and conditions restricting foreign travel, noting these are two separate issues. It emphasized that Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, which addresses passport refusal for those facing criminal proceedings, is not an absolute bar.
Relying on the Supreme Court’s recent judgment in Mahesh Kumar Agarwal vs Union of India, Justice Bhatia underscored that liberty is the State’s first obligation, not a privilege to be granted.
The trial court has now been directed to grant Choudhary an NOC for passport processing valid for 10 years.
Advocate Preeti Singh appeared for Choudhary, while AGA and Senior Advocate SB Pandey, assisted by Advocate Varun Pandey, represented the state.
