Point of Law: The personal liberty envisaged in Article-21 of Constitution of India encompasses right to travel abroad for any lawful purpose such as for tourism, employment, education, to meet friends and relations etc., and State cannot smother such a right except according to the procedure established by law.

ORDER :

The petitioner prays for a writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondents 1 to 5 in refusing to renew his passport bearing No.K1839017 which was issued on 23.02.2012 and expired on 22.02.2022 as illegal, unjust and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution and for a consequential direction to the respondents to renew his passport.

2. The petitioner’s case succinctly is thus:

(a) The petitioner is a resident of Penamalur in Krishna District. The petitioner holds passport bearing No.K1839017 which was issued on 23.02.2012 and expired on 22.02.2022. The petitioner submitted application dated 10.12.2021 for renewal of the passport. However, the 5th respondent declined to consider his application for renewal of passport on the ground that the petitioner is involved in two criminal cases i.e., (1) CC No.161/2020 on the file of Ist Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada for offences under sections, 341, 143, 188, 290 r/w 149 of IPC wherein the petitioner is accused No.3 and (2) SC No.4/2019 on the file of IV Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Vijayawada for the offences under sections 147, 148, 324, 307, 341, r/w 149 of IPC where the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.2.

(b) Questioning the summons issued to him in SC No.4/2019, the petitioner filed Criminal Petition No.2291/2019 u/s 482 Cr.P.C before this Court to quash the proceedings and this Court by its order dated 01.10.2020 granted interim orders staying all further proceedings in SC No.4/2019.

(c) Petitioner’s second daughter is residing in United States of America and the petitioner has to visit her to attend housewarming ceremony of his daughter. Therefore the petitioner needs renewal of the passport at the earliest.

(d) Petitioner contends that under Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act, 1967, the passport authority cannot refuse renewal of passport on the ground that pendency of criminal cases. Hence the writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri G.V.R Choudary would submit that what is required by the petitioner is the renewal of the passport and therefore the passport authorities shall, while considering the application for renewal, scrupulously act within the parameters of the Passport Act, 1967 either in granting or refusing renewal. Without issuing any written order, it was orally informed to the petitioner that because he was involved in two criminal cases which are pending for trial, his renewal was rejected. He would submit that application for renewal of the passport has to be made in Form EA(P)-2 prescribed under the Schedule III of the Passport Act and as per the Clause-5 of the said Form, the passport authority can only seek for information as to any criminal proceedings pending against applicant in criminal court in India or any other disqualifications under Section 10(3) of the passport Act. Learned counsel would submit that the said clause did not specifically mention that if criminal cases pending against the applicant, the authorities can refuse the renewal. In this regard, he relied upon a decision in Ashok Khanna V. Central Bureau of Investigation (265(2019)DLT614 = MANU/DE/3767/2019) case. He thus prayed to allow the writ petition. While thus prayed to allow the writ petition, the learned counsel would request that a direction may be issued to passport authorities to renew his passport and if any condition is imposed on the petitioner to appear before the Criminal Courts and execute bonds for his due return to the Country and appear in the concerned criminal cases, he will abide.

4. Per contra, learned Assistant Solicitor General argued that since the petitioner is involved in two criminal cases, it is apposite for him to obtain NOC from the concerned Criminal Courts so as to enable the passport authorities to renew his passport.

5. The point for consideration is whether there are merits in the writ petition to allow ?

6. POINT: In its wide spectrum, the personal liberty envisaged in Article-21 of the Constitution of India encompasses the r