APHC010134142025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] TUESDAY ,THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 7165/2025 Between: Bhanuprakash Seelam ...PETITIONER AND Union Of India and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. AISHWARYA NAGULA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. PELLETI RAJESH KUMAR (CENTRAL GOVERNMENT COUNSEL) The Court made the following ORDER: Heard Smt.Aishwarya Nagula, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Pelleti Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and Sri Ajay, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondents 4 and 5. 2. The above writ petition is filed assailing the action of the 3rd respondent in not renewing/reissuing the passport, in pursuance of the petitioner‟s application No.HYJ077391494325, dated 11.02.2025, is illegal and arbitrary. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the passport authority issued a passport bearing No.N1244085 dated 27.07.2015 for 10 years to the petitioner, and the same will expire on 26.07.2025. Before the 2 expiry of the passport, the petitioner applied for the renewal of a passport vide application No.HYJ077391494325, dated 11.02.2025. The 3rd respondent issued short fall notice dated 24.02.2025 (Ex.P.2) due to the pendency of two criminal cases against the petitioner. The petitioner personally approached the 3rd respondent on 27.02.2025 however, the status of the application on 13.03.2025 (Ex.P.1) remained as follows: “Police Verification Report is not clear and application is under review at Regional Passport Office”. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the authority, without passing any order, keeping the application pending, is impermissible. Learned counsel also pointed out right to travel abroad is a human right and would further contend that the law presumes an accused to be innocent until his guilt is proved. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 3, through virtual mode, would contend that he sent e-mail to the respondents 1 to 3 to send instructions, however, he could not get information from the respondents. 6. No doubt, as rightly pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner, the right to travel abroad is an important human right. The Hon‟ble Apex Court in Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India1, 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. 7. The Hon‟ble Apex Court in Sumit Mehta v State of NCT of Delhi2, observed as follows: “The law presumes an accused to be innocent till his guilt is proved. As a presumable innocent person, he is entitled 1 (1978) 1 SCC 248): AIR 1978 SC 597 2 2013 (15) SCC Page 570 3 to all the fundamental rights including the right to liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.” 8. Section 6 of the Passports Act, 1967 (for short „the Act‟) deals with the refusal of passports, travel documents etc. Section 6(2)(f), which is relevant is extracted hereunder: “6. Refusal of passports, travel documents. etc. --- (2) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the passport authority shall refuse to issue a passport or travel document for visiting any foreign country under clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section 5 on any one or more of the following grounds, and on no other ground, namely: - --- (f) that proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant are pending before a criminal court in India; --- 9. A perusal of the extracted provision would indicate that if the proceedings in respect of the offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant are pending before the criminal court in India, the authority can refuse to issue a passport or travel document. 10. The Ministry of External Affairs issued guidelines as per GSR 570 (E) dated 25.08.1993 regarding the issuance of a passport when criminal proceedings are pending against the applicant. Whenever a criminal case is pending against the applicant in a criminal court, the applicant has to produce a No Objection Certificate or an order from the court, so that the application for issuance of the passport will be considered. 11. In the case at hand, there is no dispute that two criminal cases are pending vide C.C.No.516/2022 on the file of III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Tirupati and C.C.No.750 of 2024 on the file of V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Tirupati against the petitioner. As per the averments in Para 6 of the affidavit, in pursuance of Ex.P.2 short fall notice, the petitioner attended the office of the 4 3rd respondent and submitted an explanation on 27.02.2025. When the petitioner submitted an explanation, the authority should have passed an order either accepting or rejecting the application in terms of Section 6 of the Passport Act r/w Circular vide GSR 570 (E) dated 25.08.1993. Without passing any order, keeping the application pending, in the opinion of this Court, amounts to abdication of duties on the part of the 3rd respondent. However, in the case at hand, two criminal cases are pending, and the jurisdictional magistrate had taken cognizance, the petitioner should have approached that Court. The division bench of this Court in W.A. 383 of 2024 considered the said aspect. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner will approach the jurisdictional magistrate. 12. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, without going into other aspects, since two criminal cases are pending against the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage, with the consent of learned counsel on either side, giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned criminal court and make an application. If any application is made, the learned Magistrate shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders regarding renewal/issuing passport to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, strictly as per the provisions of the Passports Act and the Rules. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 01.04.2025 KA 5 169 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 7165/2025 Date: 01.04.2025 KA