APHC010436242026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY, THE 17 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 23720/2026 Between: 1. MUPPAVARAPU SRINIVASARAO, S/O T. KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS OCCOFFICE SUBORDINATE STATE REGIONAL LIBRARY GUNTUR R/O 7 NIDUBROLU, PONNUR MANDAL GUNTUR DISTRICT. 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS SOUTH BLOCK, RAISINA HILLS NEW DELHI 2. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE AT 4TH FLOOR STALIN CENTRAL D.NO.27 GOVERNORPET M.G. ROAD VIJAYAWADA 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PONNUR TOWN POLICE STATION AT PONNUR GUNTUR DISTRICT Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may pleased toissue a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not considering the petitioner's application for renewal/re W.P.No.23720 of 2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE 17th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 23720/2026 MUPPAVARAPU SRINIVASARAO, S/O T. KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS OCCOFFICE SUBORDINATE STATE REGIONAL LIBRARY GUNTUR R/O 7-2-6/A, OVER BRIDGE DOWN, NIDUBROLU, PONNUR MANDAL GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS SOUTH BLOCK, RAISINA HILLS NEW DELHI-110001 THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE AT 4TH FLOOR STALIN CENTRAL D.NO.27 GOVERNORPET M.G. ROAD VIJAYAWADA-520001 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PONNUR TOWN POLICE STATION AT PONNUR GUNTUR DISTRICT -522124 ...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 pleased toissue a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not considering the petitioner's application for renewal/re-issuance of Passport RC,J W.P.No.23720 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI MUPPAVARAPU SRINIVASARAO, S/O T. KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS OCCOFFICE SUBORDINATE STATE REGIONAL 6/A, OVER BRIDGE DOWN, ...PETITIONER ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS SOUTH BLOCK, THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE AT 4TH FLOOR STALIN CENTRAL D.NO.27-37-158 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PONNUR TOWN POLICE STATION ...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 toissue a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not issuance of Passport RC,J W.P.No.23720 of 2026 2 bearing No.M3962126 pursuant to File No. VJ2075991956225 and Application Reference No. 25- 1065048848 despite the explanation submitted by the petitioner and the subsisting stay granted by this Hon'ble Court in Criminal Petition No.1567 of 2024 as illegal arbitrary violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of the Passports Act 1967 and consequently direct the 2 nd respondent to consider the petitioner's application for renewal/re-issuance of Passport bearing No.M3962126 pursuant to File No.VJ2075991956225 and Application Reference No. 25-1065048848 in accordance with law and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 pleased to direct the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's application for renewal/re-issuance of Passport bearing No. M 3962126 pursuant to File No. VJ2075991956225 and Application Reference No. 25-1065048848 forthwith in accordance with law pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. B V ANJANEYULU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. P PADMAVATHI (CENTRAL GOVERNMENT COUNSEL) RC,J W.P.No.23720 of 2026 3 ORDER This Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of respondents in not considering and approving his passport application for re-issuance/renewal on the ground of pendency of S.C.No.15/S/2024 pending trial before the Court of the learned IV Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Sessions Judge for trial of SC/ST Cases, Guntur, disregard to the fact that this Court granted stay of all further proceedings of the said S.C. 2. Heard Sri B.V.Anjaneyulu, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Ms.P.Padmavathi, learned Central Government Counsel. 3. Sri B.V.Anjaneyulu, learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that though this Court granted stay of all further proceedings in S.C.No.15/S/2024 pending disposal of the Crl. Petition No.1567 of 2024 filed for quashment of the said S.C. vide its orders dated 02.07.2025 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2024, the authorities are not considering and approving the petitioner’s application for renewal of passport on the ground of pendency of S.C. against him. Accordingly, prayed to allow the petition. 4. On the other hand, Ms. P.Padmavathi., learned Central Government Counsel, on counter submitted that upon receipt of adverse Police Verification RC,J W.P.No.23720 of 2026 4 Report regarding involvement of the petitioner in S.C.No.15/S/2024, the authorities had rightly declined to process his application for renewal of passport and the petitioner has to obtain no objection certificate and seek permission to travel abroad from the Court wherein the criminal proceedings are pending. Accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 5. Section 6(2) of the Passports Act, 1967, which outlines the legal grounds upon which the passport authority must or may refuse to issue a passport, travel document, or make an endorsement for visiting foreign countries, envisages that Section 6(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: - (a) that the applicant is not a citizen of India., (b) that the applicant may, or is likely to, engage outside India in activities prejudicial to the sovereignty and integrity of India., (c) that the departure of the applicant from India may, or is likely to, be detrimental to the security of India; (d) that the presence of the applicant outside India may, or is likely to, prejudice the friendly relations of India with any foreign country; (e) that the applicant has, at any time during the period of five years immediately preceding the date of his application, been convicted by a court in India for any offence involving moral turpitude and sentenced in respect thereof to imprisonment for not less than two years; (f) that proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant are pending before a criminal court in India; (g) that a warrant or summons for the appearance, or a warrant for the arrest, of the applicant has been issued by a court under any law for the time being in force or that an order prohibiting the departure from India of the applicant has been made by any such court; (h) that the applicant has been repatriated and has not reimbursed the expenditure incurred in connection with such repatriation; RC,J W.P.No.23720 of 2026 5 (i) that in the opinion of the Central Government the issue of a passport or travel document to the applicant will not be in the public interest. 6. Section 6(2)(f) relates to a situation where the applicant is facing trail in a criminal court. Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act, 1967, has been considered on several occasions by the Hon’ble Apex Court and High Courts. The Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as various High Courts held that mere pendency of a First Information Report cannot be the legal basis for denial of issuance of a regular passport to the petitioner and that it is only after cognizance is taken by an appropriate Court that it can be held that criminal proceedings have commenced and issuance or renewal of the passport would depend on no objection being given by the concerned court. 7. In the instant case, charge sheet was filed, the same was taken cognizance of by the concerned Court and was numbered as S.C.No.15/s/2024. The record shows that the petitioner filed Crl.P.No.1567 of 2024 for quashment of the said S.C. Admittedly, a coordinate bench of this Court granted stay of all further proceedings in the S.C. till further orders. Since S.C. has been stayed by this Court, pendency of Criminal Proceedings cannot be a ground for the passport authorities to reject renewal of the passport. 8. In view of the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondent authorities to consider the application of the petitioner filed for re- RC,J W.P.No.23720 of 2026 6 issuance/renewal of his passport, if otherwise satisfy all the other requirements. The petitioner shall obtain permission of the Court wherein criminal proceeding is pending whenever he intends to travel abroad. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 17th September, 2026 RR