APHC010474552024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 24363/2024 Between: 1. THANNERU UMAMAHESWARI, (KING UMANNAHESWARI AS PER PASSPORT) D/O EDUKONDALU TANNERY W/O SURESH KUMAR KING FT. NO 101, YAGANTI PRINCE APARTMENTS, BRUNDAVAN GARDENS, GUNTUR - 522007. ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REP.BY ITS JOINT SECRETARY, (MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS), SOUTH BLOCK,NEW DELHI. 2. THE PASSPORT OFFICER, NEAR P.F.OFFICE, BESIDE RYTHU BAZAR, MARRIPALEM VUDA LAYOUT, NAD POST, VISHAKAPATNAM-530009,A.P. 3. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, REGIIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE VIJAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVT, OF ANDHRA PRADESH HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KANCHIKACHERLA POLICE STATION, KRISHNA DISTRICT, A.P ...RESPONDENT(S): SRS,J W.P.No.24363 of 2024 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 Order or Direction or a Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No. 2 and 3 in not renewing the passport of the petitioner bearing No.M3264501,on the ground of pendency of Criminal Cases as violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the principles laid down in W.P No. 1392 of 2023 and batch and also W.P No.26366 of 2023 and prayed for consequential relief. IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 3RD respondent to process application of the petitioner to renew the passport bearing No. M3264501 pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SHAIK KHAJA BASHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. KAMINI VENKATESWARLU (CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL) The Court made the following: :: ORDER :: Heard Sri Shaik Khaja Basha, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri K. Venkateshwarlu, learned counsel for respondents 1 to 3 and Sri Ajay, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, for respondents 4 and 5. 2. The above writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondents 2 and 3 in not renewing/re-issuing the passport, in pursuance of the application made by the petitioner vide file No.VJ2076430680524 dated 05.04.2024, as illegal and arbitrary. Page 3 of 5 SRS,J W.P.No.24363 of 2024 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner made an application for the re-issuance of a passport. The authority, in view of the adverse police verification report, without processing the application, issued a shortfall notice dated 15.04.2025 (Ex.P2). The petitioner submitted explanation under Ex.P3. 4. Learned counsel would submit that crime Nos.1178 of 2023 and 887 of 2023 were registered against the petitioner by Nallapadu Police and after due investigation, crime No.1178 of 2023 was referred to as ‘false and insofar as crime No.887 of 2023 is concerned, it was referred to as ‘civil in nature’. Leaned counsel would submit that despite the same, respondent No.3 is not renewing/re-issuing the passport. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions did not refute the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. He submitted that crime No.1178 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 506, 509 read with 34 of IPC, on the file of Nallapadu Police Station, was referred to as ‘False’ vide C.No.456/Ref/SDPO-SD/2024 dated 30.11.2024. Crime No.887 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 417, 384, 323 and 506 read with 34 of IPC of Nallapadu Police Station was referred as ‘civil in nature’ vide C.No.457/Ref/SDPO-SD/2024 dated 30.11.2024. 6. Thus, as seen from the instructions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, since no criminal cases are pending against the petitioner, there is no legal impediment to reissue the passport to the petitioner. 7. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Sumit Mehta vs. State of NCT of Delhi1 held that 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, 1 (2013) 15 SCC 570 SRS,J W.P.No.24363 of 2024 including the right to liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 8. The Apex Court in Menaka Gandhi vs. Union of India and another2; and Satish Chandra Verma vs. Union of India (UOI) and others3, held that the right to travel abroad is a part of personal liberty. 9. Given the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage, directing respondent No.3 to consider the aforementioned application made by the petitioner for re-issuance of passport, strictly as per the provisions of the Passports Act 1967 and the Passport Rules 1980, particularly Rule 12 of the Rules regarding the period. No costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 02.07.2025 IKN 2 AIR 1978 SC 597 3 (2019) Supreme (SC) 1516 SRS,J W.P.No.24363 of 2024 137 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION No.24363 of 2024 Date : 02.07.2025 IKN