APHC010579862024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 30297/2024 Between: 1. PILLIMGARI SURENDRA YADAV, S/O. PILIIMGARIRAMAIAH, AGED 42 YEARS EGAVA GOLLAPALLI MUDIVEDU - 517 350 ANNAMAYYADISTRICT (ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR DIST.) ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS JOINT SECRETARY (MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS) SOUTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI 2. THE PASSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE 4TH FLOOR, STALIN CENTRAL D.NO.27-37-158, GOVERNORPET, M.G.ROAD VIJAYAWADA - 520002 NTR DISTRICT 3. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE VIJAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH 4. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 5. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, RAYACHOTI 6. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MUDIVEDU POLICE STATION MUDIVEDU, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT 2 ...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 Order of Direction or a Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents 2 and 3 in not renewing the passport of the petitioner bearing No.L2215866 on the ground of pendency of Criminal Cases, by considering the passport application Form for renewal submitted by me on 17.03.2022 to the respondent No.3 and to set aside the correspondence of letter in Ref.No.SCN/320213649/24 dated 09.12.2024 issued by respondent No.2 against me, are all violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the principles laid down of legality, and to pass such other order or orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. The action of the respondents 2 and 3 in not renewing the passport of the petitioner bearing NO.L2215866 on the ground of pendency of criminal cases as violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the principles laid down of legality, and consequently direct the respondents to consider the passport application Form for renewal submitted by me on 17.03.2022 to the respondent No.3 and to set aside the correspondence of letter in Ref.No.SCN/320213649/24 dated 09.12.2024 issued by respondent No.2 against me, without referring to the pendency of Criminal Cases and pass 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 3th respondent to process application of the petitioner to renew the passport bearing No.L2215866 pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. JITENDRA KANYALUR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA 2. BETHAPALLI SURYANARAYANA (CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL) 3. GP FOR HOME 3 The Court made the following: ::ORDER:: Heard Sri M.S.P Reddy, learned counsel representing Sri Jitendra Kanyalur, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri B.Suryanaryana, learned Central Government counsel for respondents 1 to 3 and Sri Ajay, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondents 4 to 6. 2. The petitioner made an application vide file No.VJ1073867598522 dated 06.01.2022 seeking issuance of passport before the 2nd respondent. A shortfall notice dated 09.12.2024 (Ex.P3), was issued to the petitioner due to an adverse police verification report. The petitioner submitted an explanation (Ex.P4). 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that mere pendency of a criminal case is no ground to deny the issuance of a passport. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that C.C.Nos.134 of 2019; 183 of 2020; 446 of 2020; 4255 of 2021 and 94 of 2022 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate of Madanapalle, Annamaiah District are pending against the petitioner, wherein the petitioner is arrayed as accused. Learned counsel would submit that the petitioner has to approach the jurisdictional Court and make an application. 5. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner will approach the jurisdictional Court and file an application. 4 6. Given the facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of both the learned counsel, giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional court and file an application. If such an application is filed by the petitioner, the learned jurisdictional court shall consider and pass appropriate orders, keeping in view Rule 12 of the Passport Rules 1980. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _____________________ SUBBA REDDY SATTI, J Dated: 03.07.2025 SNI 5 239 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 30297/2024 Dated: 03.07.2025 SNI