1. Writ against Look-out Circular and passport renewal refusal due to pending criminal proceedings. (Para 2 , 3 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(AP) 1244
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
K.SREENIVASA REDDY, J.
Pasupuleti China Chennaiah - Petitioners
Versus
The Union of India, represented by its Secretary And five (05) others - Respondents
Writ Petition No.35727 Of 2025
Decided On : 11-03-2026
Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Sri N.Ashwani Kumar
For the Respondent: GP for Home, Sri B.Somasekhar
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Sri N.Ashwani Kumar
For the Respondent: GP for Home, Sri B.Somasekhar
Right to travel is a fundamental right under Article 21. Mere pendency of criminal proceedings cannot be a ground to refuse passport renewal. Look-out Circulars should not be issued mechanically and cannot be used to prevent an accused from returning to India to face trial.
Headnote:(A) Passports Act, 1967 - Sections 5, 6(2)(f) and 10 - Passport Rules, 1980 - Rule 12 - Notification G.S.R. 570(E) - Right to travel abroad as a facet of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India - Mere pendency of criminal proceedings is not a ground to refuse passport renewal - Procedure for deprivation must be just, fair, and reasonable. (Paras 12, 14, 15, 16)
(B) Look-out Circular (LoC) - Nature and Scope - LoCs are coercive measures that interfere with personal liberty and free movement - Should not be issued in a mechanical manner and are reserved for grave offenses or when the accused deliberately evades arrest/summons - Continuance of LoC when it obstructs the accused from returning to face trial amounts to abuse of process of law. (Paras 18, 19, 20, 21)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, residing in a foreign country, was arrayed as an accused in a criminal case involving offenses under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. A Non-Bailable Warrant was issued by the trial court. The petitioner's passport expired, and the renewal application was placed on hold due to the pending criminal case. Simultaneously, a Look-out Circular was issued against the petitioner, which prevented him from traveling to India to recall the warrant and face trial.
Findings of Court:
The Court found that the right to travel is a fundamental right under Article 21. Pendency of a criminal case is not an absolute bar to passport renewal. Based on undertaking affidavits filed by relatives, the Court exempted the petitioner from the operation of Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967 and directed the renewal of the passport for ten years. The Court further held that the Look-out Circular was issued without considering the petitioner's willingness to cooperate and its continuance would be an abuse of law.
Issues: Whether the refusal to renew the passport due to pending criminal proceedings and the issuance of a Look-out Circular were illegal and arbitrary, and whether the petitioner is entitled to the renewal of his passport and the quashing of the circular to return to India.
Ratio Decidendi: Right to travel abroad is a fundamental right under Article 21; any restriction must be based on a fair and reasonable procedure. Under the Passports Act, criminal pendency is not a ground to refuse renewal if court permission is obtained. Look-out Circulars are restrictive measures that must not be used mechanically; they are inappropriate when they impede an accused's ability to surrender or cooperate with the trial court.
Result: Writ Petition is allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
- constitutional law
- crime and sentencing
- practice and procedure
- administrative law
Table of Contents
2. Petitioner: LoC infringes liberty, ready to face trial. Respondents: Petitioner may flee if LoC removed. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 )
3. Right to travel under Article 21; LoC must be proportionate, not mechanical for non-grave offences. (Para 16 , 18 , 20 , 21 )
4. Passport renewal can be allowed with court permission despite pending case under GSR 570(E), Passports Act. (Para 12 , 15 , 17 )
5. Writ allowed; LoC quashed; passport renewal directed for ten years. (Para 17 , 21 , 22 )
6. Can a passport be renewed when criminal proceedings are pending against the applicant?
Yes, if the court grants permission under GSR 570(E) exempting the applicant from Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967. (Para 12 , 15 , 17 )
7. What is the legal standard for issuing a Look-out Circular (LoC) against an accused?
LoC is a coercive measure for grave offences or when accused evades process; it must be proportionate and not infringe Article 21 arbitrarily. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 )
8. Does the pendency of a Non-Bailable Warrant automatically justify refusal to renew a passport?
No. The court can grant exemption from Section 6(2)(f) for passport renewal if the accused undertakes to appear and cooperate with trial. (Para 11 , 17 )
ORDER :
K.SREENIVASA REDDY, J.
Heard Sri N.Ashwani Kumar, learned counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Sri B.Somasekhar, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and learned Government Pleader for Home representing respondent Nos.5 and 6.
2. The Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the Look-out Circular (LoC) vide Ref.No.2025/10031/002706 dated 17.04.2025 issued by respondent No.2 notifying the presence of Writ Petitioner as an accused, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14, 19 (1) (a), 19 (1) (g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the Office Memorandum, dated 27.10.2010 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs (Foreign Division) No.250163/31/2010-Imm, and declare the action of respondent No.4 in not renewing the Passport of the Writ Petitioner vide No.N5750211, as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of provisions of the Passports Act, 1967 (for brevity 'the Act, 1967') and consequently, direct the respondent No.4 to renew the passport for a period of 10 (Ten) years in terms of the Passports Act, 1967.
3. Contents of the affidavit filed by the Writ Petitioner, in brief, are that the Writ Petitioner went to Australia in the year 2018 to pursue his Masters' Degree and presently, he got employment at Melbourne, Australia. The Writ Petitioner left India on 03.07.2024 and even though he had not visited India subsequently, basing on the report given by one Gosi Vijaya Kumari, respondent No.6 registered a case in Crime No.71 of 2025 of Nallapadu Police Station, Guntur on 19.01.2025, for the offences punishable under Section 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity 'BNS') and Sections 3 (1) (r), 3 (1) (s) and 3 (2) (vA) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for brevity 'the SCs & the STs Act, 1989') against the Writ Petitioner and another. After filing charge sheet, the IV Additional District Judge-cum-Special Sessions Court for trial of Cases filed under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 took cognizance of the case as Sessions Case No.165 of 2025 and it is pending for trial. The Writ Petitioner was arrayed as accused No.1 in the said case and he did not commit any offence and only in order to harass him, the said crime was got registered. Accused No.2 in the said Sessions Case, got filed Criminal Petition No.11094 of 2025 on the file of this Court seeking the Court to quash the case proceedings against him and this Court dispensed his presence before the Trial Court.
(b) The Writ Petitioner holds Indian Passport vide No.N5750211 issued on 11.01.2016, valid till 10.01.2026; that the Writ Petitioner is presently residing in Australia and applied for renewal of passport vide Application No.AMIB/030925/0157/01, dated 03.09.2025, but he received an e-Mail on 24.10.2025 from the Consulate General of India, Melbourne stating that his passport has been marked 'Adverse' and placed on hold due to pendency of Sessions Case before the Special Court. The Writ Petitioner filed Criminal Miscellaneous Petition vide CFR no.3792 dated 28.11.2025 under Section 6 (2) (f) of the Act, 1967 before the Special Court, seeking permission for renewal of his passport, but it was returned on the ground that Non-Bailable Warrant is pending and the presence of Writ Petitioner is compulsory.
(c) Upon the request made by respondent Nos.5 and 6, respondent No.2 issued Look-out Circular No.2025413751 vide Ref.No.2025/10031/002706, dated 17.04.2025. Due to issuance of LoC, the Writ Petitioner was prevented from travelling abroad or from returning to India. The passport of the Writ Petitioner is currently pending for renewal with the Indian Embassy at Melbourne, Australia and is awaiting necessary clearance from respondent Nos.2 to 6 as the passport of the Writ Petitioner expired on 10.01.2026 and there exists every threat that the Writ Petitioner be declared as an illegal immigrant
