APHC010500482025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] WEDNESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 26353/2025 Between: 1. RAVINDRA KOVELAMUDI,, S/O. NARAYANA RAO, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCC- GUNTUR MAYOR, R/O. D.NO.5-80-11, 1ST LANE, ASHOK NAGAR, GUNTUR CITY, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, VIJAYAWADA, D.NO.27- 37-158, 4TH 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, COLLECTOR OFFICE ROAD, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 JS,J W.P.No.26353 of 2025 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 of the Petitioner vide Application No.VJ2076567871924 dated 20.05.2024 due to 1 pending case in Crime No.435/2020 of Arundelpet P.S., Guntur District as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, contrary to law and against the principles of natural 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.L9310604 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 pass an interim order by directing the Respondent No.1 to consider the passport renewal application of the Petitioner vide Application NO.VJ2076567871924 dated 20.05.2024 for renewal of passport NO.L9310604 to the Petitioner, until disposal of the main writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SRINIVASA RAO NARRA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. The Court made the following: 3 JS,J W.P.No.26353 of 2025 ORDER: The present Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner seeking the following relief: “…..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 of the petitioner vide application No.VJ2076567871924 dated 20.05.2024 due to one pending case in Crime No.435 of 2020 of Arundalpet P.S., Guntur District, as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, contrary to law and against the principles of natural 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.L9310604 and pass such other order or orders……” , 2. Heard Sri Narra Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Central Government Standing Counsel, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2, and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing on behalf of respondent No.3. 3. The petitioner was the holder of Passport No.L9310604, which expired on 05.06.2024. On 20.05.2024, the petitioner has made an application vide File No.VJ2076567871924 for the renewal of his passport before the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent has not renewed the petitioner‟s passport due to an adverse police verification report 4 JS,J W.P.No.26353 of 2025 stating that he is involved in Crime No.435 of 2020, registered for the offences under Sections 188, 269 of IPC and Section 3 of EDA Act on the file of Arundalpet P.S., Guntur. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that mere pendency of a criminal case is not a bar to renew passport to the petitioner and in support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the order, dated 26.09.2024, passed by this Court in W.P. No.18328 of 2024. 5. At the hearing, learned Central Government Counsel, appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 and 2, and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing on behalf of the respondent No.3, submits that in Crime No.435 of 2020, Arundalpet P.S., Guntur, after conducting investigation filed charge sheet on the file of the V Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Guntur vide C.C. No.112 of 2023. Since the competent criminal Court has taken cognizance, the petitioner has to approach the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate Court. 6. A Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No.383 of 2024, considered the said aspect of cognizance by the Court in a criminal case vis-à-vis an application made for the issuance of a passport and observed as follows: “16. Considering the facts of the present case on the touchstone of the principles laid down in the aforementioned judgments, it is clear that the Court of Special Mobile Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kakinada, having not taken judicial notice of the charge sheet filed before it, cannot be said to have taken cognizance much less can the Court be said to have initiated proceedings in terms of Chapter XVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 5 JS,J W.P.No.26353 of 2025 17. Therefore, we would have no hesitation in holding that proceedings would be said to have been pending only if cognizance had been taken by the Court and steps had been taken by the Court under Chapter XVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Since, there was no cognizance taken, there would be no question of „proceedings pending before a criminal Court‟, which would attract the provisions of Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967.” 7. In the case on hand, the Criminal Court has taken cognizance and issued summons. Once the criminal Court has taken cognizance, the petitioner has to approach the jurisdictional Court and make an appropriate application. 8. Apart from the above discussion, in the case on hand, the petitioner without approaching the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate Court, has straightaway approached this Court. This Court does not find, in the facts of this case, infringement of right, if any, of the petitioner to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner will approach the jurisdictional Magistrate Court concerned. 9. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of, giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the learned jurisdictional criminal Court and make an appropriate application. If such an application is filed, the learned jurisdictional Court concerned shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders, as per the Passports Act and the Rules, as expeditiously as possible. However, the petitioner shall 6 JS,J W.P.No.26353 of 2025 appear before the Court concerned as and when his presence is required. No order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. ____________________ SUMATHI JAGADAM, J 12th November, 2025 kas/cbs 7 JS,J W.P.No.26353 of 2025 HON‟BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM W.P.No.26353 of 2025 12th November, 2025 kas/cbs