APHC010553252025 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: 28640/2025 Between: 1. THOYAJAKSHI PERUMALAKUPPAM,, W/O. MADHU KARANAM, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.22-272/3, LAWYERS COLONY, KATTAMANCHI, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, SOUTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110011. 2. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, 4TH FLOOR, STALIN CENTRAL, M.G.ROAD, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, DISHA WOMEN (MAHILA) POLICE STATION, TIRUPATHI, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. ...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 of Mandamus, or other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the respondents more particularly the 2nd respondent herein not releasing the Passport bearing NO.V4297817 of the petitioner and further vide File.No.VJ8073637166721 dated 20-08-2025 insisting the petitioner to obtain permission to travel abroad from the same Court where the criminal proceedings are pending for further process as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, opposed to the provisions contemplated 2 JS,J W.P.No.28640/2025 under the Passports Act, 1967 and Rules made thereunder and contrary to the legal parlance and Constitutional Mandates besides being opposed to Articles 14, 19 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently set-aside the proceedings in File.No.VJ807363716672 1 dated 20-08-2025 issued by the 2nd respondent 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 respondents herein forthwith to release the Passport bearing No.V4297817 of the Petitioner enable to travel abroad with the permission of this Hon’ble Court, pending disposal of the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P DURGA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. 3 JS,J W.P.No.28640/2025 The Court made the following ORDER: Heard Sri P. Durga Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ajay, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent No.3. 2. The petitioner is having valid passport up to 08.11.2031. The petitioner’s daughter-in-law has lodged a complaint for the offences under Sections 498-A, 403, 420 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The petitioner’s passport was seized. The petitioner along with her husband filed W.P.No.21674 of 2024. This Court on 20.01.2025 has dispensed with the presence of the petitioner and her husband. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is intending to go abroad and addressed letters to the 2nd respondent-passport authorities on 14.07.2025 and 14.08.2025 for release of her passport bearing No.V4297817. Since the police have received an adverse report, the respondents are not taking action for release of the petitioner’s passport. Learned counsel further submits that the respondents have filed charge sheet in Crime No.128 of 2023 and the matter was posted to 06.08.2025. Since this Court has dispensed with the presence of the petitioner, the petitioner is seeking a relief to go abroad by placing reliance on the following judgments 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 2 2013 (15) SCC page 570 4 JS,J W.P.No.28640/2025 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. 4. Sri Ajay, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on oral instructions, submits that charge sheet is already filed and learned IV Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupathi, took cognizance of the case in C.C.No.69 of 2024. Therefore, the petitioner may approach the competent Court for the issuance of the passport. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner, in reply, submitted that liberty may be granted to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional Court. 6. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sumit Mehta v. State of NCT of Delhi5 held as follows: <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 including the right to liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.= 7. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home and in the light of 3 2021 SCC OnLine SC 3549 4 2019 SCC Online SC 2048 5 2013 (15) SCC 570 5 JS,J W.P.No.28640/2025 the law laid down by the Apex Court in Sumit Mehta referred supra, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to approach the Court of the learned IV Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupathi and make an application. Upon making such an application, the jurisdictional Court shall pass an appropriate order specifying the period, taking into account Rule 12 of the Rules. It is needless to say that the petitioner will appear before the learned IV Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupathi, as and when he is required. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Dated: 17.10.2025 KAS 6 JS,J W.P.No.28640/2025 210 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 28640/2025 Dated: 17.10.2025 KAS 7 JS,J W.P.No.28640/2025