APHC010535472025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 27916/2025 Between: 1. VINODA REDDY VEMULA, S/O. ATCHI REDDY, AGED 51 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 4-35, RAMAPURAM VILLAGE, DACHEPALLI MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF EXTERNALAFFAIRS, NEW DELHI. 2. REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, PASSPORT OFFICE, 4TH FLOOR, STALIN CENTRAL, D. NO. 27-37-158, GOVERNORPET, M.G. ROAD, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, DACHEPALLI POLICE STATION, PALNADU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...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 a Writ or Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not processing the application of the petitioner for issuance of passport with file No. VJ2065400992225, dated 31.07.2025 with the reason that police verification report is not clear as illegal, arbitrary, discriminating, unjust against to Article 14, 19, 21 of Constitution of India and against to the rules of Passport Act and consequentially direct the 2nd respondent to issue the 2 JS,J W.P.No.27916/2025 passport by considering the application dated 31.07.2025 in file No. VJ2065400992225 forthwith and pass 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 2nd respondent to issue the passport by considering the application dated 31.07.2025 in file No. VJ2065400992225 forthwith pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass IA NO: 2 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 allow the interlocutory application to amend the date of the passport application from "31.07.2025" to "27.06.2025" in the body and the prayer clause of the Writ Petition in W.P. No. 27916 of 2025 and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. CHETAN PONNURU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. Y V ANIL KUMAR 3. The Court made the following: 3 JS,J W.P.No.27916/2025 ORDER: Heard Sri Chetan Ponnuru, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Ajay, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing for respondent No.3. 2. The petitioner’s son is studying in the United States of America and applied on 27.06.2025 vide application No.25-1055207156 for the issuance of a passport, which was kept in abeyance on the ground that Crime No.202 of 2023 is pending against the petitioner. 3. The 3rd respondent vide proceedings C.No.190/refer/SPDO-SPL dated 18.05.2025, deleted the petitioner's name from the list of accused. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner asserts that Section 6 (2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967 applies to the persons who are facing trial before the criminal Court and the same is extracted hereunder: “that proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant are pending before a criminal court in India”. 5. Learned counsel further relied 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 observed that the law presumes an accused to be innocent till his guilt is proved. As a presumable the right to travel abroad is part of personal liberty and 1(1978) 1 SCC 248 22013 (15) SCC page 570 4 JS,J W.P.No.27916/2025 cannot be deprived except in accordance with the procedure established by law, as per Article 21 of the Constitution of India. iii. In Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu v. Central Bureau of Investigation3, the Hon’ble Apex Court held that mere pendency of criminal cases cannot be a ground to deny renewal of passport. iv. In Satish Chandra Verma v. Union of India and Others 4 , it is observed at Para No.5 that the right to travel abroad is an important basic human right and 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. 6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, submits that the role of this respondent is to furnish the antecedent report to the passport authorities. Since the name of the petitioner is deleted from Crime No.202 of 2023, it is open for the 2nd respondent to take an appropriate decision in accordance with the Passports Act, 1967. 7. Since the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Dachepalli, has submitted proposals for deletion of name of the petitioner vide proceedings, dated 18.05.2025, this Court can safely conclude that no criminal cases are pending against the petitioner. 8. Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the 2nd respondent to issue the passport forthwith. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Dated: 17.10.2025 KAS 32021 SCC OnLine SC 3549 4 2019 SCC OnLine SC 2048 5 JS,J W.P.No.27916/2025 203 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 27916/2025 Dated: 17.10.2025 KAS