The mere pendency of criminal proceedings cannot justify the refusal to renew a passport, provided the applicant complies with legal obligations.

ORDER :

Moushumi Bhattacharya, J.

The present writ petition has been filed challenging the failure of the respondent No.2-Regional Passport Officer in re-issuing the petitioner’s passport and for a direction on the respondent No.2 to re-issue the passport of the petitioner.

2. The respondent authorities are represented.

3. After hearing learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the respondents, it appears that the issue was considered by 2 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 Crl.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 (supra) where the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the Passport Authority cannot refuse the renewal of passport on the ground of pendency of criminal proceedings and accordingly directed the Passport Authority to renew the passport of the petitioner without raising objection relating to pendency of criminal proceedings.

4. This Court is accordingly of the view that the Writ Petition can be disposed of by directing the respondent No.2 to take steps for re-issuing the passport 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 I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally in C.C.No.7279 of 2024 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 within 2 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 his application for re-issuance 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 be at liberty to file an application before the learned First Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally seeking permission to travel outside India. The learned First Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally shall consider the same in accordance with law.

5. W.P.No.35582 of 2024 is disposed of in terms of the above. Interim orders, if any, shall stand vacated and all connected applications are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.