APHC010432922025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 23093 OF 2025 Between: Ravindra Babu Vasireddy, S/o. Sambasiva Rao, aged about 62 years, R/o. D.NO.13-4-80/2C, Sambasivapeta, Narasaraopet Town, Palnadu District, A.P. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The Regional Passport Officer, Vijayawada, D.No.27-37-158 Stalin Central, Governorpet, M.G. Road, Vijayawada, N.T.R. A.P. 2. Union of India, Ministry of External Affairs, Rep. by the Secretary, 23 Janpath Rd, Rajpath Area, Central Secretariat, New Delhi, India 3. The Superintendent of Police, District Police Office Palnadu District, A.P , Floor, District, D Narasaraopet ...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 Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of considering the passport renewal application of the Petitioner vide Application NO.VJE077577806325 dated 29.04.2025 due to 1 the Respondent No.1 in not pending case in FIR ' No.62/2024 of Narasaraopet II Town P.S. arbitrary, unjust, contrary to law and .f of Palnadu District as highly illegal, against the principles of natural justice and ,n violation of Article 14, 19, 21 and 300-A'bf the Constitution of India and also against The Passports Act, 1967 Z and Rules therein and consequently renew the passport of the Petitioner vide direct the Respondent No.1 to Passport NO.M9693660. lA NO: 1 OF 2n7/> Petition under Section 151 CPC j in the affidavit filed in support of the petition praying that in the circumstances stated , the High Court may be pleased to pass an interim order by directing the Respondent No.1 to consider the Passport renewal application of the Petitioner for renewal vide Application of passport NO.VJE077577806325 NO.M9693660 to the Petitioner, until disposal of the main writ petition. BABU GODAVARTHI 1 & 2: SRI O. UDAYA KUMAR (CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL) GP FOR HOME dated 29.04.2025 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI KIRAN Counsel for the Respondent Nos. Counsel for the Respondent No.3: The Court made the following order: APHC010432922025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] TUESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 23093/2025 Between: 1.RAVINDRA BABU VASIREDDY, S/0. SAMBASIVA RAO, AGED R/0. D.NO.13-4-80/2C, SAMBASIVAPETA, ABOUT 62 YEARS, NARASARAOPET TOWN, PALNADU DISTRICT, A.P. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, VIJAYAWADA, D.NO.27-37- 158, FLOOR, STALIN CENTRAL, GOVERNORPET, M.G. ROAD, VIJAYAWADA, N.T.R. DISTRICT, A.P. 2. UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, 23 D, JANPATH RD, RAJPATH AREA, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI, INDIA 3.THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT, A.P ...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 to issue Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.1 in not considering the passport renewal application ofthe Petitioner vide Application NO.VJE077577806325 dated 29.04.2025 due to 1 pending case in FIR No.62/2024 of Narasaraopet II Town P.S. of Palnadu District as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, contrary to law and against the principles of natural justice 2 JS,J W.P,No.23093/2025 and in violation of Article 14, 19. 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and also against The Passports Act, 1967 and Rules therein and consequently direct the Respondent No.1 to renew the passport of the Petitioner vide Passport NO.M9693660 and pass 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 pass an interim order by directing the Respondent No.1 to consider the Passportrenewal application of the NO.VJE077577806325 dated 29.04.2025 Petitioner vide Application for renewal of passport NO.M9693660 to the Petitioner, until disposal of the main writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KIRAN BABU GODAVARTHI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.0' UDAYA KUMAR (CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL) 3 JS,J W.P.No 23093/2025 The Court made the following ORDER: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: "...fo issue Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No. 1 in not considering the passport renewal application of the Petitioner vide Application NO.VJE077577806325 dated 29.04.2025 due to 1 pending case in FIR No.62/2024 of Narasaraopet II Town P.S. of Palnadu District as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, contrary to law and against the principles of ndtural justice and in violation of Article 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and also against The Passports Act, 1967 and Rules therein and consequently direct the Respondent No. 1 to renew the passport of the Petitioner vide Passport No.M9693660 and pass...” The petitioner's case, in brief, is that the petitioner was issued a passport bearing No. M9693660, dated 08.06.2015, for a ten-year period. On 29.04.2025, the petitioner applied for the renewal of his passport vide file No. VJE077577806325. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s passport was not renewed on the ground that he was involved in a case vide crime No.62 of 2024 on the file of the Narasaraopet II Town Police Station, Palnadu District. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the mere pendency of criminal cases is not a ground to deny reissuance of a passport. He further argues that the Hon’ble Apex Court in Satwant Singh Sawhney v. D. Ramarathnam, Assistant Passport Officer, New Delhi and Others, observed that the right to travel abroad is a part of personal liberty and cannot be deprived except according to the procedure established by law as per Article 21 of the Constitution of India. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, submits that although the charge sheet is filed, cognizance has not yet been taken by the concerned jurisdictional Court, and the protest application filed by the de-facto complainant is still pending. 2. 3. 4. 4 JS,J W.P.No.23093/2025 5. In the instant case since the jurisdictional Court has not taken cognizance and the mere pendency of a crime is not a barrier to renew or reissue the passport, this Court finds it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the 1"* respondent to issue the passport to the petitioner without any further delay, without reference to Crime No. 62 of 2024, dated 24.04.2024. 6. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this appeal shall stand closed. Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, Regional Passport Officer, Vijayawada, D.No.27-37-158, Floor, Governorpet, M.G. Road, Vijayawada, N.T.R. District, 1. The Stalin Central A.P. 2. The Secretary, Ministry Janpath Rd, Rajpath Area, Central Secretariat, New Delhi, India Superintendent of Police, District Police Office, Narasaraopet, of External Affairs, Union of India, 23 D, 3. The Palnadu District, A.P 4. One CC to Sri Kiran Babu Godavarthi, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Sri O. Udaya Kumar (Central Govt. Counsel) [OPUC] 6. Two CD Copies. ssb HIGH COURT DATED;09/09/2025 ORDER WP No.23093 OF 2025 d 19 SEP 2025 y-y «» DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS