APHC010334022025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) v . - THURSDAY.THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 18031 OF 2025 Between: Guduri Venkateswarlu, S/o Rajarao, Aged about 45 years, R/o 13-1-1-2C, Rama Heights Apairtrhents, Prakash Nagar, Ward No. 10, Narasaraopeta, Palnadu District. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur. 2. The Regional Passport Officer, 4^^ Floor, Stalin Central, D.No.27-37- 158, Governorpet, M.G.Road, Vjayawada-520 002. ■ 3. The Station House Officer, Vinukonda Police Station, Palnadu 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 a writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the inaction of Respondent No. 2 in renewing Petitioners passport vide bearing No.M964032 through^ application vide bearing File No.VJE077516215125 dated 26.03.2025 on the pretext of pendency of Session Case vide bearing S.C.No.81/S/2022 on the file of the Honble Court of the IV Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Sessions Court for SC ST Cases, Guntur as null and void, dehorsjurisdicti on and ultra vires the vested powers, manifestly arbitrary, capricious, whimsical r per se I, vindictive, unreasonable, contrary to purport of Passports Act, 1967 j * and Violative of Articles 14, 16, 21 and 309 of the Constitution of Indiaand f ' cohseqdently, to direct the Respondent No.2 to renew Petitioner s Passport vide-bearing No.M964032. 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 Respondent No.2 to renew Petitioner’s passport vide bearing ! NO.M964032 notwithstanding pending S.C.No.81/S/2022 the file of the Hon ble Court of the IV'AcIclitional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Sessions Court for SC ST Cases. ' Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI AKULA SRI KRISHNA SAI BHARGAV Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.2:SRI PELLETI RAJESH KUMAR (CENTRAL GOVERNMENT COUNSEL) The Court made the following order: r APHC010334022025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 18031/2025 Between: 1.GUDURI VENKATESWARLU, S/0 RAJARAO, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/0 13-1-1-20, RAMA HEIGHTS APAIRTMENTS, PRAKASH NAGAR, WARD NO. 10, NARASARAOPETA, PALNADU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL DEPARTMENT, SECRETARY HOME VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR. SECRETARIAT, 2.THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, 4TH CENTRAL FLOOR, STALIN GOVERNORPET, M.G.ROAD, D.NO.27-37-158, VJAYAWADA-520 002. 3.THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VINUKONDA POLICE STATION, PALNADU DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 tomay be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the inaction of Respondent No 2 in renewing Petitioners passport vide bearing No.M964032 through application vide bearing File No.VJE077516215125 dated 26.03.2025on the pretext of pendency of Session Case vide bearing S.C.No.81/S/2022 on the file of the Honble Court of the IV Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Sessions 2 n Court for SC ST Cases, Guntur as null and void, dehorsjurisdiction and ultra vires the vested powers, manifestly arbitrary, capricious, whimsical per se Illegai, vindictive, unreasonable, contrary to purport of Passports Act 1967 and violative of Articles 14, 16, 21 and 309 of the Constitution consequently, to direct the Respondent No.2 to renew Petitioner s Passport vide bearing No.M964032and/or pass and/or pass such of Indiaand lA NO: 1 OF 2Q2fi 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 may be pleased to direct the Respondent No.2 to renew Petitioner's passport vide bearing No.M964032 notwithstanding pending S.C.No.81/S/2022 Of the Hon’ble Court of the IV Additional , Sessions Court for SC ST Casesand/or pass such the file Sessions Judge-cum-Special Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.AKULA SRI KRISHNA SAI BHARGAV Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR HOME 2. DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following: 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 18031/2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed claiming the following relief: 1. "...to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus by to declare the inaction of Respondent No.2 in renewing petitioner’s passport vide bearing No.M964032 through application vide bearing File NO.VJE077516215125 dated 26.03.2025 on the pretext of pendency of Session Case vide bearing S.C.No.81/S/2022 on the file of the Hon’ble Court of the IV Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Sessions Court for SC, ST Cases, Guntur as null and void, dehors jurisdiction and ultra vires the vested powers, manifestly arbitrary, capricious, whimsical, per se illegal, vindictive, unreasonable, contrary to purport of Passports Act, 1967 and violative of Articles 14, 16, 21 and 309 of the Constitution of India and consequently, to direct the Respondent No. 2 to renew petitioner’s passport vide bearing No. M964032 and to pass such other order or orders... ” The brief case of the petitioner is that the 2^^^ respondent issued 2. passport bearing No.M964032 in favour of the petitioner and the same is valid upto 04.06.2025. Due to the political rivals, a false crime has been registered rd against the petitioner vide FIR No.233 of 2021 on the file of the 3 respondent. After investigation, the crime is numbered as S.C.No.81/S/2022 on the file of the IV Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Sessions Court for SC/ST Cases, Guntur. The petitioner made an apptication dated 26.03.2025 seeking for renewal of his passport. Pursuant to the said application, the 2nd respondent issued a notice dated 15.05.2025 to the petitioner calling for explanation with regard to the criminal case registered against him. For which, the petitioner submitted his reply dated 26.05.2025 to the 2""^ respondent stating that the petitioner has no knowledge about the said criminal case and after submitting the application for renewal of the passport, he came to know that due to the political rivals, a false criminal case was registered against him and further requested the 2"^^ respondent for renewal of the passport. But the 2""' respondent did not consider the same. Hence, the present Writ Petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has applied for renewal of the passport. He further submits that the Respondent Authorities particularly Respondent No.2 in not accepting the explanation of the petitioner and denying the renewal/re-issuance of the passport of the petitioner is nothing but infringement of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. more an 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is the fundamental right of the petitioner to hold a passport and freedom to go abroad as per his wish as held in catena of judgments rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court particularly in Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of lndia\ Learned counsel for the petitioner also relied upon the ratio laid down by this Court in Dr. Venkata Rao Vara and Union of India ahd others^. In view of the settled principles of law, the petitioner is entitled for renewal/re-issuance of the passport 5. ' 1978 AIR 597 ^ W.P.No.4196 of 2024, dated 20.02.2024 5 learned Government Pleader for Home submits that a On the other hand 6. registered against the petitioner vide FIR No.233 of 2021 on the is numbered as crime has been respondent. After investigation, the crimo file of the IV Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special rd file of the 3 S.C.NO.81/S/2022 on the Sessions Court for SC/ST Cases, Guntur. learned Central Government counsel for the the Ministry’s GSR 570(E) Notification dated Sri Pelleti Rajesh Kumar, 7. respondent No.2 submits that as per 25.08.1993, when a criminal case is pending against the applicant in any Criminal Court, the applicant has to produce either an Acquittal Order or No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the Court below where case is pending along with GSR 570(E) undertaking. Hence, if the Court gives permission to the applicant to travel passport, the and directs the Respondent Authorities to issue abroad Respondents will comply the order in accordance with the GSR 570(E). also further contended that in the light of the decision of the learned Judge in Kadar Valli Shaik’s Case^, the petitioner is required to obtain orders from the Court below, where the Sessions case i.e., S.C.No.81/S/2022 is pending 8. It is against him. counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader and Sri Pelleti Rajesh Kumar, learned Central respondent No.2 and also perused the material placed Heard the learned 9. for respondent Nos.1 and 3 Government Counsel for on record. " W.P.No.1392 of 2023, dated 07.03.2023 6 10. In Kadar Valli Shaik’s Case(3 Supra), the learned Judge had dealt with various case law on the subject and passed a detailed order, the operative portion of which reads as follows;- (a) The prayer of writ petitioners seeking direction passport authorities to to the respondent renew the passport without insisting compliance with the notification dated 25.08.1993, notwithstanding the pendency of the criminal case in the Court concerned for Mai. is rejected. on (b) A direction is issued to the respondents No. 1 to 3 to consider the cases of the petitioners covered under clause (f) of Section 6 (2) of the Passports Act, for renewal of the passport, on production of the order from the concerned Court where the criminal case is pending for trial (c) On production of an order from the concerned Court, application for renewal shall not be rejected on the ground of mere pendency of the criminal as aforesaid, the in Court, but subject to compliance of other requirements under notification dated 25.08.1993. case 11. Further in W.P No.30373 of 2022 the same vide orders dated 28.09.2022, the relevant follows:- a learned Judge of this Court disposed of portion of which reads as “9. A learned Single Judge of the High Court at Madras dated 04.02.2021 in W.P.No.20058 of 2020 held that mere pendency of a First Information Report cannot be the legal basis for denial of issuance of a regular passport to the petitioner and that it is only after cognizance taken by an appropriate Court that it IS can be held that criminal proceedings have commenced and issuance or renewal of the passport would be depend on no objection being given by the concerned Court. 7 The Central Government has also Issued G.S.R.No.570(E), dated 25.08.1993 stipulating that a no objection order would be required from a Court only if it falls within the ambit of Section 6(2)(f). ” In view of the fact that Section 6(2)(f) would arise only when there is a pending proceedings before the Criminal Court after cognizance is taken, it would have to be held that as of now there is no pending criminal proceeding before the Court. ” In Narige Ravindranath vs. The Union of India and others'^, the High 10. 11. 12. Court for the State of Telangana held as follows: 6. The Apex Court in the judgment reported in 2013 (15) SCC page 570 in Sumit Mehta u State of NCT of Delhi at para 13 observed as under: 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 Apex Court in its judgment dated 09.04.2019 reported in LAWS 2019(2) SCC online SC 2048 in Satish Chandra Verma v Union of India (UOI) and others at para 4 observed as under: "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 ^ W.P.No.25141 of 2023, dated 03.10.2023 \ 8 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." 13. In the light of the above settled position of Law, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the petitioner to approach the Court of IV Additional Sessions Judge- cum-Special Sessions Court for SC/ST cases, Guntur or the Jurisdictional Criminal Court where S.C.No.81/S/2022 is pending and seek appropriate orders in the terms of the legal position referred to supra, within a period of one(1) week from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If the petitioner makes any such application, the same shall be dealt with by the competent Court as expeditiously as possible, and appropriate orders shall be passed within a period of four(4) weeks thereafter. On the petitioner producing a copy of the orders/NOC from the competent Court, the pass port authority shall dispose of the petitioner’s application, within a period of two (2) weeks thereafter. 14. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 15. Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- M.PRABHAKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTTGNOFFICER To 1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi,Guntur. ' ; The Regional Passport Officer, 4'^ Floor, Stalin Central, D.No.27-37- 158, Governorpet, M.G.Road, Vjayawacla-520 002. ■ The Station House Officer, Vinukonda Police Station, Palnadu District. One CC to Sri Akula Sri Krishna Sai Bhargav, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sri Pelleti Rajesh Kumar (Central Government Counsel) [OPUC] Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] Two CD Copies. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. ssb HIGH COURT DATED:24/07/2025 ORDER WP No.18031 OF 2025 *1 2 9 AUG 2025 VssCuaent SectioivXS^^ m o DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS