APHC010474442025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 24975/2025 Between: 1. SIVA SHANKAR PASUPULATE, S/O. MUNAIAH PASUPULATE, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. D.NO.93/216, SUBBANNAGARI PALLI, MAMILLAPALLE, CHINTHAKOMMADINNE, YSR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, SOUTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI 2. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, VIJAYAWADA, 4TH FLOOR, STALIN CENTRAL, D.NO.27- 37, 158, GOVERNORPET, M.G. ROAD, VIJAYAWADA 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, KADAPA. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, C.K.DINNE POLICE STATION, YSR KADAPA 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 to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned letter/endorsement dated 11.08.2025 issued by the 2nd respondent vide Letter Ref. No. SCN/104980994/25, effectively refusing to issue the Passport in File No. 2 JS, J W.P.No.24975 of 2025 VJ1065465210525, and quash the same as arbitrary, illegal, violative of principles of natural justice and Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.2 to issue Passport in my favour forthwith, subject to obtaining necessary permission from the Trial Court if required, recognizing the minor nature of the pending case and the lack of grounds for denial. IA 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 issue Passport in my favour forthwith, subject to obtaining necessary permission from the Trial Court if required and pass s Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V R REDDY KOVVURI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. A RAVINDRA BABU (CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL) The Court made the following: 3 JS, J W.P.No.24975 of 2025 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned letter/endorsement dated 11.08.2025 issued by the 2ndrespondent vide Letter Ref. No. SCN/104980994/25, effectively refusing to issue the Passport in File No. VJ1065465210525, and quash the same as arbitrary, illegal, violative of principles of natural justice and Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.2 to issue Passport in my favour forthwith, subject to obtaining necessary permission from the Trial Court if required, recognizing the minor nature of the pending case and the lack of grounds for denial.” (in verbatim) 2. On 09.07.2025, the petitioner, under File No. VJ1065465210525, applied for a new passport before the 2nd respondent. However, on 11.08.2025, the 2nd respondent issued a letter instructing the petitioner to appear and provide a suitable explanation regarding the pending of Crime No.337 of 2023 against him within 30 days. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that all the offences are bailable and non-cognizable, and the 2nd respondent, without conducting proper verification, has mechanically issued the letter based on the pendency of the case. 4 JS, J W.P.No.24975 of 2025 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the mere pendency of a criminal case is not a valid reason to refuse the issue of a passport and relies on the following decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court. i) In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India1, it is observed that the right to travel Abroad is a part of personal liberty and the right to possess a passport etc., can only be curtailed following law and not on the subjective satisfaction of anyone. ii) In Sumit Mehta v. State of NCT of Delhi2, it is held 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.” 5. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, representing respondent Nos. 3 and 4, submits that the learned II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kadapa, has taken cognisance of the case in S.T.C. No. 167 of 2024, and the case is scheduled for 28.10.2025 “for Appearance”. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in reply, submits that since cognizance has already been taken by the trial Court, the petitioner will file an application before the Court having jurisdiction. 1(1978) 1 SCC 248 22013 (15) SCC 570 5 JS, J W.P.No.24975 of 2025 7. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the petitioner to approach the learned II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kadapa, and file an appropriate application for issuance of a fresh passport. Upon filing such an application, the jurisdictional Court shall pass an appropriate order specifying the period, considering Rule 12 of the Passport Rules, 1980. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM 23rd September, 2025 cbn 6 JS, J W.P.No.24975 of 2025 168 THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WP No.24975 of 2025 23rdSeptember, 2025 7 JS, J W.P.No.24975 of 2025 cbn