Petitioner Held Vanuatu Passport While Claiming Indian Citizenship; Punjab & Haryana HC Dismisses Travel Abroad Application With Costs

Punjab & Haryana High Court found that Prerit Goel suppressed his Vanuatu citizenship when obtaining a Look Out Circular quashing order, and dismissed his travel-abroad application with Rs. 50,000 costs payable to PGIMER’s Poor Patients Welfare Fund.

A Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry, has dismissed an application filed by Prerit Goel seeking permission to travel to London from 15 April 2026 to 20 September 2026. The Bench found that Goel had suppressed a material fact — that he was a citizen of the Republic of Vanuatu, not India — when the High Court quashed Look Out Circulars (LOCs) against him on 20 January 2026. The court imposed costs of Rs. 50,000, directed to be deposited with the Poor Patients Welfare Fund at PGIMER, Chandigarh, within thirty days. A copy of the order has been directed to be sent to the Supreme Court for placement in the pending Special Leave Appeal.

The Writ Petition and the LOC Quashing Order

CWP-12631-2023 was filed by Ashok Kumar Goel and others against the Union of India, challenging Look Out Circulars issued against them. Prerit Goel appeared as petitioner No. 3 in that petition. The writ petition was filed on 30 May 2023.

On 20 January 2026, the High Court finally disposed of CWP-12631-2023, quashing the LOCs. The court relied on a judgment dated 14 November 2025 rendered by the Delhi High Court in Manan Goel v. Union of India & Ors. (Writ Petition (C) 12169/2021). The quashing was made subject to the petitioners furnishing a specific undertaking by affidavit: that they would cooperate in any investigation, appear before investigating authorities as required, and provide all material and documents requested by investigating agencies.

That final order of 20 January 2026 was subsequently challenged before the Supreme Court. Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 10530 of 2026, titled Bank of Baroda & Anr. v. Ashok Kumar Goel & Ors., is pending consideration.

The Supreme Court’s Interlocutory Direction

By an interlocutory order dated 06 April 2026 in the pending SLP, the Supreme Court issued notice and extended a specific liberty to the private respondents — the writ petitioners before the High Court. The Apex Court directed that pending consideration of the SLP on interim stay, those parties “shall seek permission from the High Court in the event they wish to travel abroad.” The Supreme Court further observed that any such application filed before the High Court in the disposed writ petition shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously.

Acting on this liberty, Prerit Goel filed CM-5629-CWP-2026 under Section 151 CPC before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, seeking permission to travel to London from 15 April 2026 to 20 September 2026.

Suppression of Vanuatu Citizenship Comes to Light

During the course of arguments in CM-5629-CWP-2026, it emerged that when CWP-12631-2023 was filed on 30 May 2023, Prerit Goel had averred in the petition that he was a citizen of India residing in Gurgaon, Haryana. In fact, at that time, he was holding the passport of the Republic of Vanuatu. Since India does not recognise dual citizenship, he was not an Indian citizen at the time of filing.

This fact was not disclosed in the writ petition. It came to the High Court’s attention only when Goel filed the present travel-abroad application, CM-5629-CWP-2026, where he disclosed his Vanuatu citizenship for the first time.

On 08 May 2026, the High Court took note of this and issued a show-cause notice to Prerit Goel as to why the final order dated 20 January 2026 should not be recalled. In response, Goel filed an affidavit dated 12 May 2026 (CM-8060-CWP-2026), attributing the non-disclosure to inadvertence and bona fide mistake, and denying any deliberate suppression.

Why the Court Found Suppression Material

The Bench addressed the significance of citizenship in the context of a petition challenging a Look Out Circular. The court observed that a LOC is issued where there is a flight risk, and that in such a petition, the citizenship of the petitioner directly bears on the court’s assessment. A person holding a foreign passport presents a different risk profile from an Indian citizen.

The Bench stated that the least expected of a petitioner invoking the power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution, read with the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court, is that no material fact be suppressed while drafting and filing the petition.

The court held that Prerit Goel, by presenting himself as a citizen of India when he was in fact a citizen of the Republic of Vanuatu, suppressed a material fact. The Bench recorded that “in all probability, if this fact was known to this Court, then possibility of this Court not having allowed CWP-12631-2023 cannot be ruled out.”

Accordingly, the Division Bench held that the final order dated 20 January 2026 in CWP-12631-2023 was obtained by Prerit Goel by suppressing a material fact.

Restraint on Recalling the Order Due to Pending SLP

Despite the finding of suppression, the Bench declined to disturb the final order of 20 January 2026. The reason was that the matter is now sub judice before the Supreme Court in SLP (C) No. 10530 of 2026. The court expressly stated that it was refraining from recalling the order on that account alone.

The Bench also noted that it had no knowledge of whether Prerit Goel had disclosed his Vanuatu citizenship before the Supreme Court in the pending SLP. A copy of the order has been directed to be sent to the Apex Court for placement in SLP (C) No. 10530 of 2026.

Outcome

CM-8060-CWP-2026, the affidavit application filed by Prerit Goel, was taken on record and allowed.

CM-5629-CWP-2026, the application seeking permission to travel abroad to London from 15 April 2026 to 20 September 2026, was dismissed with costs of Rs. 50,000. The costs are to be deposited by Prerit Goel with the Poor Patients Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh, within thirty days from the date of the order.

The record of the case has been directed to be consigned to the Record Room. A copy of the order is to be sent to the Supreme Court for placement in the pending Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 10530 of 2026, titled Bank of Baroda & Anr. v. Ashok Kumar Goel & Ors.