IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda, J.
Potturi Radhika - Petitioner
Versus
The Union Of India and Others - Respondents
Writ Petition No: 19974/2024
Decided On : 23-09-2024
Passport - Renewal - Passports Act, 1967, Section 6(2) - The court interpreted the provisions of the Passports Act, emphasizing that a passport cannot be denied solely based on pending criminal proceedings, affirming the fundamental right to travel.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought renewal of her expired passport, which was denied by the Passport Officer due to adverse police remarks related to a pending criminal case against her family. The petitioner argued this denial infringed her fundamental rights.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the denial of passport renewal based on pending criminal proceedings was contrary to law, as the petitioner is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and thus entitled to her fundamental rights.
Issues: Whether the Passport Officer's refusal to renew the petitioner's passport based on pending criminal proceedings was lawful.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the presumption of innocence protects the petitioner's right to hold a passport, and the Passport Officer cannot deny renewal based solely on pending criminal charges.
Result: The court directed the Passport Officer to renew the petitioner's passport without objection related to the pending criminal case.
ORDER :
Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda, J.
1. This writ petition is filed claiming the following relief:
“…to issue writ, direction or order more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent/Passport Officer in not renewing my passport bearing No.H9804377 as illegal, arbitrary and capricious against the principles of natural justice offending Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent/Regional Passport Officer to renew my passport bearing No. H9804377 for a period of ten years in the interest of justice and to pass such other order or orders…”
2. The case of the petitioner is as follows:
3. Petitioner herein was issued passport bearing No.H9804377 and the same is valid from 04.06.2010 to 03.06.2020. After expiry of the said passport, the petitioner made an application to the 2nd respondent for renewal of her passport. Then, the 2nd respondent directed the petitioner herein to surrender her passport on the ground that adverse remarks were received from the police. Pursuant to the same, the petitioner herein surrendered his passport on 19.06.2020. Accordingly, a surrender certificate dated 22.06.2020 has also been issued to the petitioner to that effect.
4. Later, daughter-in-law/ wife of the elder son of the petitioner herein lodged a criminal case vide Crime No.215/2015 at Tadepalligudem Police Station, West Godavari District, under Sections 498, 406, 323, 506 r/w 34 of I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and FIR was registered against the petitioner herein along with his family members. A1 being petitioner’s elder son.
5. After investigation, the 4th respondent herein registered a crime in Cr.No.215 of 2015 against the petitioner’s elder son and other family members. In the said criminal case the petitioner was shown as accused No.2. Thereafter, the said criminal case was numbered as C.C.No.130 of 2020 on the file of I Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tadepalligudem and is still pending. While so, subject criminal proceedings were challenged by the petitioner vide Criminal Petition No.3554 of 2021 on the file of High Court, wherein this Court was pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in C.C.No.130 of 2020.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has applied for renewal of passport to secure better employment in abroad. He further submits that the Respondent Authorities more particularly Respondent No.2 is not accepting the application of the petitioner and denying the renewal of the passport of the petitioner which is nothing but an infringement of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Hence the writ petition.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is the fundamental right of the petitioner to hold a passport and freedom to go abroad as per her wish as held in catena of judgments rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court particularly in Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India 1978 AIR 597.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the Respondents and also perused the material placed on record.
9. It appears that the surrender certificate dated 22.06.2020 was issued by Respondent No.2 on the premise that the petitioner herein is involved in a serious criminal case. But, the fact remains that the said criminal case is not yet finalized and the same is still pending on the file of the I Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the proceedings of Respondent No.2 directing to surrender the passport of the petitioner is contrary to the law.
10. This Court opines that the Respondent Authorities cannot direct for surrendering the passport of the petitioner on the ground of pendency of a criminal case.
11. For more understanding, Section 6(2) of the Passports Act, 1967 is extracted hereunder:
“Subject to the other p
AI
The right to travel abroad is a fundamental right, and passport renewal cannot be denied solely due to pending criminal proceedings.
The right to hold a passport and travel abroad is a fundamental right, which cannot be denied on the basis of pending criminal proceedings without due process, reinforcing the presumption of innocenc....
The right to travel is a fundamental right, and pending criminal cases cannot automatically bar passport renewal if the application is otherwise valid.
The right to travel abroad is a fundamental right, and passport renewal cannot be denied solely based on pending criminal cases without prior court cognizance.
The denial of a passport renewal based solely on a pending criminal case violates the fundamental rights provided by the Constitution.
The right to travel abroad is a fundamental right, and passport renewal cannot be denied solely based on pending criminal cases without proper legal justification.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.