A petition has been submitted to the Punjab and Haryana High Court, requesting instructions to the Ambala Police in Haryana to abstain from commencing the cancellation of passports and visas of farmers engaged in "peaceful protests" without adhering to appropriate legal procedures.

Uday Pratap Singh, a practicing lawyer, has submitted an application in the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) related to the farmer's protest. The farmers are demonstrating to demand a law ensuring Minimum Support Price (MSP), among other demands.

Singh asserts that on February 28, an alarming announcement was issued by the Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) Ambala, regarding the commencement of the cancellation process for passports and visas of farmers who have been "peacefully protesting for their rights over the past weeks."

Section 10 of the Passport Act, 1967, delineates specific grounds for impounding or revoking passports and travel documents. These grounds encompass concerns related to national security, fraudulent acquisition of passports, passport tampering, suppression of material information, and convictions for certain offenses involving moral turpitude.

The application contends that the actions of the Ambala Police in canceling passports and visas without adhering to the provisions of Section 10 of the Passport Act raise significant legal concerns and necessitate urgent judicial intervention.

The plea additionally requests directions to the Haryana Police to promptly discontinue the purported use of buckshot pellet guns during crowd control operations, aligning with the prohibition outlined in the Punjab Police Rules of 1934.

The PIL is listed for March 07.

Case Title: Uday Pratap Singh v. Union of India and Others