IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTYFIVE (< Mi X o O PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 6714 OF 2025 Between: Sankara Rao, Aged 45 years R/o. H. No. 15-3- 20/21, Old Bus Station Near TDP Office, Thullur, Palanadu District ...PETITIONER AND 1. The Union of India, Represented by its Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs South Block, New Delhi. 2. The Passport Authority of India, Represented by its Chief Passport Officer PSP Division, Ministry of External Affairs Room No.8, Patiala House, Tilak Marg New Delhi. Jhe Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office 4th Floor, Stalin Central D. No. 27-37-158 Governerpet, M.G. Road Vijayawada, NTR District 4. The Station House Officer, Thullur, Thullur Police Station Thullur Guntur District ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the petitioner's application vide File No. VJE067281462125, dated 07.01.2025 for issuance of Passport under the guise a case in Crime No.08/2023 of Thullur Police Station as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the petitioner's right under Article 21 of Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of Passport Act 1967 and the rules more made there under and consequently direct the respondents to issue the passport to the petitioner forthwith in the interest of justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 3'^'^ respondent to consider the application of the petitioner in the file No. VJE067281462125, dated 07.01.2025 for issuance of passport pending disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI KAMBHAMPATI RAMESH BABU Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 ; SRI VENNA HEMANTH KUMAR, SC FOR CENTRAL GOVERNMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : GP FOR HOME The Court at the stage of admission made the following: ORDER a-t APHC010128232025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 6714/2025 Between: Bikki Nageswara Rao ...PETITIONER AND The Union Of India and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KAMBHAMPATI RAMESH BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR HOME 2. The Court made the following: ORDER Heard Sri Kambhampati Ramesh Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Venna Hemanth Kumar, learned standing counsel for Central Government for respondents 1 to 3 and Sri Ajay, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondent. f fk The petitioner made an application for the issuance of a passport vide File No.VJE067281462125 dated 07.01.2025 (Ex.P1) to the 3 respondent. Notice dated 23.01.2025 (Ex.P3) seeking clarification was issued to the petitioner intimating about the adverse police verification report. The petitioner submitted an explanation (Ex.P4). Along with the explanation, the petitioner submitted a copy of the order in W.P.No.32035 of 2022 dated 29.09.2022. 2. rd Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that so far the police have not filed a charge sheet. The mere pendency of a criminal case does not bar the authority from issuing a passport. Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967 (for short ‘the Act’) and the guidelines issued vide G.S.R. 570(E) dated 25.08.1993 have no application to the facts of the case. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, would submit that against the petitioner, a case was registered vide Crime No.8 of 2023 of Thulluru Police Station for the offence under Section 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 r/w 34 of I PC and the police are yet to file charge sheet. 4. Sri Venna Hemanth Kumar, learned standing counsel for the Central Government would submit that in view of the adverse report submitted by the police, the authorities did not issue the passport to the petitioner. 5. Section 6 of the Act deals with the refusal of passports, travel documents etc. Section 6 (2) (f), which is relevant is extracted hereunder; 6. 6. Refusal of passports, travel documents, etc. Page 3 of 5 4t' Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the passport authority shall refuse to issue a passport or travel document for visiting any foreign country under clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section 5 on any one or more of the following grounds, and on no other ground, namely; - (2) (f) that proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant are pending before a criminal court in India; The Hon’ble Apex Court in Sumit Mehta Vs. State of NCT of Delhi\ observed as follows: 7. “The law presumes an accused to be innocent till his guilt is proved. As a presumable innocent person, he is entitled to all the fundamental rights including the right to liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.” The Hon’ble Apex Court in Division Bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court in its decision reported in Satish Chandra Verma Vs. Union of India (UOI) and others^, observed as under; 8. "The right to travel abroad is an important basic human right for it nourishes independent and self-determining creative character of the individual, not only by extending his freedoms of action, but also by extending the scope of his experience. The right also extends to private life; marriage, family and friendship which are the basic humanities which can be affected through refusal of freedom to go abroad and this freedom is a genuine human right." ' 2013(15) see Page 570 ^ 2019 see Online Se 2048 i The Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.383 of 2024 dated 29.10.2024 considered Section 6(2)(f) of the Act, the judicial proceedings pending against an individual and taking cognizance by the Magistrate and observed as under: 9. Considering the facts of the present case on the touchstone of the principles laid down in the aforementioned judgments, it is clear that the Court of Special Mobile Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kakinada, having not taken judicial notice of the charge sheet filed before it, cannot be said to have taken cognizance much less can the Court be said to have initiated proceedings in terms of Chapter XVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 16. Therefore, we would have no hesitation in holding that proceedings would be said to have been pending only if cognizance had been taken by the Court and steps had been taken by the Court under Chapter XVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Since, there was no cognizance taken, there would be no question of ‘proceedings pending before a criminal Court’, which would attract the provisions of Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967.” 17. 10. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of lndia^ clearly observed that the right to travel abroad is a part of a personal liberty and the right to possess a passport etc., can only be curtailed following law and not on the subjective satisfaction of anyone. In the case at hand, there is no dispute that a criminal case was registered against the petitioner. However, no charge sheet is filed by the police. The petitioner submitted an explanation to the clarification notice dated 23.01.2025 issued by the 3'^'^ respondent. Given the expressions 11. 2 (1976T1 see 248): AIR 1978 Se 597 '■Ifc supra, mere registration of a crime is no ground to deny the passport, if the application is otherwise in order. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of, at the admission stage, with the consent of learned counsel on either side, directing the respondent to issue a passport to the petitioner, in pursuance of the application made by him vide File NO.VJE067281462125 dated 07.01.2025 (Ex.P1), keeping in view Section 7 of the Act read with Rule 12 of the Passport Rules, 1980, without reference to the Crime No.8 of 2023 of Thulluru Police Station. No costs. 12. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- M. SRINIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Secretary, Union of India, Ministry of External Affairs South Block, New Delhi. 2. The Chief Passport Officer, Passport Authority of India, PSP Division, Ministry of External Affairs Room No.8, Patiala House, Tilak Marg New Delhi. 3. The Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office Floor, Stalin Central D. No. 27-37-158 Governerpet, M.G. Road Vijayawada, NTR District 4. The Station House Officer, Thullur, Thullur Police Station Thuilur, Guntur District. 5. One CC to Sri Kambhampati Ramesh Babu, Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to Sri Venna Hemanth Kumar, SC for Central Government [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. (OUT) 8. Three C.D. Copies. Cnr w HIGH COURT DATED:19/03/2025 ORDER * 2 7 MAR 2025 ^ . Current Jieciion . WP.No.6714 of 2025 a <o W DISPOSING OF THE W.P. AT THE STAGE OF ADMISION WITHOUT COSTS