IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ;;:: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT the honourable SRI JUSTICE SUBBA WRIT PETITION NO: 13184 OF 2n?.i> REDDY SATTI Between: Kamm^atem’ ““ ViHage, Nekarikallu Mandal Palnadu District -522615, A.P. Kunkalagunta (New), Guntur District (Old) ...Petitioner AND ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 the circumstances stated i be pleased to issue an of the Constitution of India in the affidavit filed therewith praying that in the High Court may or direction appropriate Writ, Order particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus more declaring the action of 4 the respondents more particularly of 3rd respondent in rejecting to renew ^ the passport of the petitioner without considering the application of the petitioner dated 17.04.2025 in respect of two criminal cases registered against the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional and the same is violation of Article 14, 19, 21 and 25 of the Constitution of India and to consequently direct the Respondents to renew the passport of the petitioner as per the provision of Passport Act, 1967. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 direct the respondents to renew the passport of the petitioner at the earliest in view of settled principles of law by the Hon’ble Apex Court & Hon’ble High Courts, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. S SIVA RAMA KRISHNA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: SRI PASALA PONNA RAO DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No. 4: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following order: APHC010257492025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY JHE NINTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 13184/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER Kanumuri Baji Babu AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The Union Of India and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.SS RAMA KRISHNA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. The Court made the following: :: ORDER:: The above writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondent No.3 in not renewing/re-issuing the passport, in pursuance of the application made by the petitioner vide File No.VJ2077561605125 dated 17.04.2025, due to the pendency of a criminal cases in Cr.No.78 of 2024 and 142 of 2024 on the file of Nekarekal Police Station, Palnadu District, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Heard Sri K. Siva Rama Krishna Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner: learned Standing Counsel, for respondents 1 to 3 and Sri Ajay, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appeared for respondent No.4. 4 Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner applied for renewal/reissue of the passport, on 17.04.2025. The authority without processing the application addressed a letter dated 26.04.2025, to the petitioner informing about the pendency of the aforementioned criminal cases against him. He would submit that mere pendency of criminal cases does not bar the authority from issuing passport. Sri Ajay, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would submit that the investigation in the aforementioned cases is pending and final reports are not yet filed. Thus, as seen from the material available on record, there is no dispute regarding the pendency of Cr.No.78 of 2024 and 142 of 2024 on the file of Nekarekal Police Station, Palnadu District, against the petitioner. However, they are at the stage of investigation and the jurisdictional court has not taken any cognizance. Section 6 of the Act deals with the refusal of passports, travel documents etc. Section 6(2)(f), which is relevant is extracted hereunder: 3. 4. 5. 6. 6. Refusal of passports, travel documents, etc. 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 Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India', observed that the right to travel abroad is a part of personal liberty and the 7. (1978) 1 see 248): AIR 1978 Se 597 right to possess a passport etc., can only be curtailed following law and not on the subjective satisfaction of anyone. The Division Bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court in its decision reported in Satish Chandra Verma v. 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." The Hon’ble Apex Court in Sumit Mehta v. State of NCT of Delhi^ 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.” 9. The Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.383 of 2024, considered the said aspect of cognisance by the Court in a criminal case vis-a-vis an application made for the issuance of a passport and observed as follows: 10. “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. ^ LAWS 2019(2) see Online Se 2048 ^2013(15) see Page 570 hesitation in holding that 17. Therefore, we would have no would be said to have been pending only if cognizance Court and steps had been taken by the Court proceedings had been taken by the I of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Since, there was taken there would be no question of ‘proceedings under Chapter XVI no cognizance - pending before a criminal Court', which wouid attract the provisions of Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967.” sheets (final reports) have been filed by In the case at hand, no charge the investigating agency so far. Mere pendency of crinninal cases, is not a bar for renewing the passport. 11. the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondent No.3 to renew/re-issue the passport of the petitioner, in pursuance of the application made wde File No^ VJ2077561605125 dated 17.04.2025, without reference to Cr.No.78 of 2024 and 142 of 2024 on the file of Nekarekal Police Station, Palnadu District. No order as to costs. 12. Given shall stand closed. sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any As a SD/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGIS i RAR //TRUE COPY// ffero FFICER SECT To, 1. The Secretary, CPV and Overseas Indian Affairs, Union of India, Ministry of External Affairs, South Block, New Delhi, India. 2. The Chief passport Officer, Passport Authority of India, PSP Division, Ministry of External Affairs, Room No.8, Patiala House, New Delhi, India. Regional Passport Officer, 4th Floor, Stalin Central, D/o 27-37-158 3. The Governor pet, MG Road Vijayawada -520002. A.P. 4. The Principal Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh, Home Department Secretariat, Amaravati, Guntur District, A.P. 5. One CC to Sri. SS Rama Krishna Prasad Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to Sri Pasala Ponna Rao Deputy Solicitor General of India [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court of Andhra Pradesh[OUT] 8. Three CD Copies GSC HIGH COURT DATED:09/05/2025 ORDER WP.No.13184 of 2025 DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS