APHC010174492024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] MONDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 9100/2024 Between: 1. CHILAKALA JOHN SUNDAR RAO, OCC-RETIRED MEO, R/O. H.NO.30-226, A.B.M.COMPOUND, VINUKONDA TOWN 85 MANDAL,PALNADU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, CPV DIVISION, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, ROOM NO. 8, PATIALA HOUSE, TILAK MARG NEW DELHI - 110001, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF PASS PORT OFFICER (CPO)/SECRETARY. 2. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, VISAKHAPATNAM, NEAR P.F.OFFICE, BESIDE RYTHU BAZAR, MARRIPALEM, VUDA LAYOUT, NAD POST, VISAKHAPATNAM, 530009. 3. ASSISTNAT PASSPORT OFFICER PASSPORT OFFICE, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VINUKONDA TOWN POLICE STATION, VINUKONDA, PALNADU DISTRICT. R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER THE COURT'S ORDER DT.17.03.2025 IN I.A.NO. 02 OF 2024. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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 more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the impugned action of the 3rd respondent in refusing to renew/reissue petitioner vide no.K6904624 order passport no.VJ2075193100523, dt.26.06.2023 directing the petitioner to obtain permission to travel abroad from the same Hon Tale Court where the criminal proceedings are still pending on the ground that FIR.No.287/2020 on the file of Vinukonda Town P.S for the offences punishable u/sec.406, 420, 467 of IPC is pending against the petitioner even though no charge sheet is filed in the said FIR and no criminal proceedings are pending before the court., as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently set aside the impugned order no.VJ2075193100523, dt.26.06.2023 of 3rd respondent with a direction to renew/reissue the petitioner passport no. K6904624.,and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the impugned action of the 3rd respondent in refusing to renew/reissue petitioner vide no.K6904624 order passport no.VJ2075193100523, dt.26.06.2023 directing the petitioner to obtain permission to travel abroad from the same Hon Tale Court where the criminal proceedings are still pending on the ground that FIR.No.287/2020 on the file of Vinukonda Town P.S for the offences punishable u/sec.406, 420, 467 of IPC is pending against the petitioner even though no charge sheet is filed in the said FIR and no criminal proceedings are pending before the court., as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently set aside the impugned order no.VJ2075193100523, dt.26.06.2023 of 3rd respondent with a direction to renew/reissue the petitioner passport no. K6904624.,and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased leased to permit the petitioner to implead the proposed respondent as party respondent no.4 in W.P.No.9100 of 2024 and as well as in I.A.No. 1 of 2024., and pass 3 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. G VENKATA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. DIVYA DATLA(CENTRAL GOVERNMENT COUNSEL) 2. DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA 3. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following ORDER: Heard Sri G.Venkata Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt.Divya Datla, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri Ajay, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondents 3 and 4. 2. The petitioner made an application for reissuance of passport vide VJ2075193100523 dated 26.06.2023 before the 2nd respondent. A short-fall notice dated 13.04.2023 was issued to the petitioner due to an adverse police verification report. The petitioner submitted an explanation under Ex.P.4 dated 12.05.2023. Another notice dated 26.06.2023 (Ex.P.5) was issued to the petitioner to get permission from the jurisdictional Court. A reminder notice was issued to the petitioner under Ex.P.6 dated 24.01.2024. The petitioner submitted an explanation vide Ex.P.7 dated 20.02.2024. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that mere pendency of a criminal case does not impede the reissuance of a passport. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits that in pursuance of Crime No.287 of 2020 of Vinukonda Town Police Station, the police filed a final report before the jurisdictional court i.e. Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vinukonda. The jurisdictional court has taken cognizance of the crime vide C.C.No.450 of 2021, and the same is pending. Learned counsel would submit that the petitioner has to approach the jurisdictional court and make an application. 4 5. When a Court has taken cognizance of a crime and a calendar case is pending, the applicant must necessarily approach the jurisdictional Court and make an application, and the Jurisdictional Court will pass appropriate orders. 6. A Division Bench of this Court, in the order dated 29.10.2024 in W.A.No.383 of 2024, considered Section 6(2)(f) of the Act, the judicial proceedings pending against an individual, and taking cognizance by the Magistrate observed as under: “16. 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. 17. 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.” 7. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner will make an application before the learned jurisdictional Magistrate. 8. 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 giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vinukonda, where C.C.No.450/2021 is pending and make an application. If such an application is made, the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vinukonda, shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders regarding renewal/issuing passport to the petitioner as expeditiously as 5 possible, keeping in view Rule 12 of the Passport Act and the Rules. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 07.07.2025 KA 6 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 9100/2024 Date: 07.07.2025 KA 7