Mere pendency of a criminal case cannot serve as a valid ground for denying the renewal of a passport, affirming individual rights to travel.

ORDER :

1. This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:

“...to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No. 3 in refusing to renew her passport Bearing No.N3100652 issued on 22-09-2015 and valid till 21-09-2025 on the ground of pendency of Criminal case CC No.1023/2020 pending on the file of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate At Jangaon vide their letter in File No.HY1074922827625 dated 21-04-2025 and issued by the Respondent No.3 as illegal, Arbitrary and violative of Art 19, 21 and 300A of the constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to forthwith renew the passport of the Petitioner made vide File No.HY1074922827625 dated 21-04-2025 for a period of 10 years under Section 10 of Passports Act, 1967 and under Rule 12 of Passport Rules, 1980 without reference to the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner in CC No. 1023/2020 on the file of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate At Jangaon and also the Gazette notification issued by the Central Government vide GSR No.570 (E) dated 25-8-1993 by setting aside the rejection letter in File No.HY1074922827625 dated 21-04-2025 issued by Respondent No.3 and to release the same to the petitioner herein in the interest of Justice ...”

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondents.

3. Learned counsel appearing for both the parties submitted that the issue involved in this Writ Petition was considered by two Co-ordinate Benches in W.P.Nos.8697 of 2023 and 22218 of 2024. Both the learned Single Judges referred to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu v. Central Bureau of Investigation , 2020 Cri. L.J. (SC) 572 and came to the finding that mere pendency of criminal case cannot be a ground to decline the renewal of passport. The petitioner before the Court is also willing to cooperate with the pending proceedings. This Court also finds factual similarities between the present case and Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu’s case (supra).

4. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that the Writ Petition can be disposed of by directing the respondent No.3 to take steps for renewal of passport of the petitioner in due compliance of the findings of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu’s case (supra). The petitioner shall however comply with the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall submit an undertaking along with an affidavit before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Jangaon, in C.C.No.1023 of 2020 stating that the petitioner will not leave India during pendency of the said case without permission of the Court and that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial Court in concluding the criminal proceedings.

(ii) The trial Court shall issue a certified copy of the undertaking and affidavit to the petitioner within two weeks from the date of filing of the undertaking.

(iii) The petitioner shall submit the certified copy of the aforesaid undertaking before the concerned Passport Officer for consideration of her application for renewal of passport.

(iv) The Passport Authority shall consider the documents in the light of the observations made by the Court as well as the undertaking and other documents filed by the petitioner. The petitioner shall also be at liberty to rely on the decisions in this regard.

(v) The petitioner shall deposit the original passport before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Jangaon, after renewal of passport. The petitioner shall be at liberty to file an application before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrat