APHC010186162025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY ,THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 9519/2025 Between: Inavolu Padmavathi ...PETITIONER AND The Union Of India and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. D KASI RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. The Court made the following ORDER: Heard Sri D.Kasi Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt.Umadevi, learned panel counsel for respondents 1 to 3, and Sri Ajay, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the 4th respondent. 2. The above writ petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents in not renewing/reissuing the petitioner’s passport in pursuance of the petitioner’s application vide No.VJ2076201938324 dated 12.03.2024, due to the pendency of a criminal case against the petitioner, is illegal and arbitrary. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner’s passport bearing No.K8249084 expired on 04.03.2023. The 3rd respondent 2 issued a show-cause notice dated 12.03.2024 (Ex.P.1) seeking clarification due to an adverse police verification report. Another notice dated 29.05.2024 (Ex.P.2) was issued. The petitioner submitted an explanation on 10.04.2024. Despite the explanation submitted by the petitioner, the 3rd respondent failed to renew / reissue the passport to the petitioner. 4. Learned panel counsel and learned Assistant Government Pleader would submit that a criminal case vide C.C.No.754 of 2023 on the file of the III Additional Munsif Magistrate at Ongole arising out of Crime No.72 of 2022 of Disha women Police Station, Ongole has been pending against the petitioner. The petitioner is shown as the 7th accused in the criminal case. The petitioner has to make an application before the jurisdictional court. 5. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner filed Crl.P.No.7888 of 2024 to quash the charge sheet in C.C.No.754 of 2023 on the file of the III Additional Munsif Magistrate at Ongole. An interim order was granted on 28.11.2024, and the same is being extended from time to time. Consideration : 6. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Sumit Mehta v State of NCT of Delhi1, observed as follows: “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.” 7. The Division Bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court in its decision reported in Satish Chandra Verma v. Union of India (UOI) and others2, observed as under: 1 2013 (15) SCC Page 570 2 (2019) Supreme (SC) 1516 3 "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." 8. In the case at hand, there is no dispute that a criminal case vide C.C.No.754 of 2023 on the file of the III Additional Munsif Magistrate at Ongole is pending against the petitioner and the petitioner is arrayed as the 7th accused therein. The petitioner also admitted the fact that she filed a criminal petition to quash the charge sheet in C.C.No.754 of 2023, and the coordinate bench of this court granted an interim stay of proceedings vide order dated 28.11.2024 in Crl.P.No.7888 of 2024. 9. Learned counsel would submit that the interim stay is being extended from time to time, and it is subsisting as on today. 10. It is pertinent to mention here that the 1st respondent issued notification vide G.S.R. 570(E) dated 25.08.1993. As per the guidelines in G.S.R.570(E), when a criminal case is pending against the applicant, the applicant has to produce NOC from the competent jurisdictional court along with an undertaking. 11. As indicated supra, the Coordinate bench of this Court granted an interim stay in Crl.P.No.7888 of 2024. Given the stay of further proceedings in C.C., even if the petitioner makes an application, the Court would not dispose of the same. It is also pertinent to mention here that the offences punishable are under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 r/w 34 of IPC and Section 4 of DP Act. 12. Given the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the 3rd respondent to consider the application of the petitioner for renewal / reissuance of passport in accordance with law without 4 reference to C.C.No.754 of 2023. The petitioner shall also submit any other documents required by the authority. If the petitioner intends to travel abroad, the petitioner shall obtain prior permission from the learned jurisdictional Magistrate or any other appropriate forum. 12. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 10.04.2025 KA 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 9519/2025 Date: 10.04.2025 KA