ORDER:

The present Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following relief:

“…to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not renewing/reissuing the Petitioner‟s Passport in pursuant to his application in file No.VJ3074150872922 dated 25.04.2022 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unreasonable, high- handed and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India apart from the provisions of Passport Act, 1967 and consequently direct the Respondents to renew/reissue the same forthwith and pass….”

2. The short grievance of the petitioner herein is that, though the petitioner was acquitted by the competent Criminal Court vide Judgement dated 20.06.2017 in CC.No.329 of 2011, the passport authorities are not renewing/reissuing the Petitioner‟s Passport pursuant to his application in file No.VJ3074150872922 dated

25.04.2022.

3. Heard Sri K.Naga Phanindra, learned counsel, representing Sri S.Yogesh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Alekhya Tadasina, learned counsel for the respondents.

4. Sri K.Naga Phanindra, learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit contended that, though the petitioner has been acquitted of the Criminal charges in CC.No.329 of 2011, the authorities are not renewing/reissuing the Petitioner‟s Passport. As such, the present Writ Petition is filed and prayed to pass appropriate orders in that regard.

5. On the other hand, Smt. Alekhya Tadasina, learned counsel for the respondents, on written instructions, submitted that, apart from CC.No.329 of 2011, from which the petitioner has been acquitted, two other criminal cases are pending against the petitioner vide C.C.No.116 of 2021 on the file of Hon‟ble JFCM, Banaganipalli and SC.No.75/2021 on the file of the Special Judge for SC ST cases, Kurnool. In view of pendency of the said criminal cases, the petitioner cannot seek any relief before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

6. She further submitted that, this Court in similar set of facts, dismissed the Writ Petition with a liberty to the petitioner therein to file an appropriate application before the concerned Court where criminal case is pending against the petitioner. On filing of such application, the concerned Court was directed to dispose of the same, in accordance with law. In view of the same, appropriate orders may be passed.

7. Perused the record.

8. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has made an application for issuance of passport vide Application No.VJ3074150872922 dated 25.04.2022. The authorities did not consider the said application as criminal cases are pending against the petitioner. As per Section 6(2) (f) of the passport, there is an explicit bar in respect of issuance of passport to such persons. For expedience Section 6(2) (f) is extracted hereunder:

“(2) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the passport authority shall refuse to issue a passport or travel document for visiting any foreign country under clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section 5 on any one or more of the following grounds, and on no other ground, namely:—

. . . . . . . .

(f) that proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant are pending before a criminal court in India;”

However, as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner as per Notification G.S.R.570(E) dated 25.08.1993, issuance of passport to such persons can be considered, if he obtains an order permitting him to travel abroad is obtained from the competent Criminal Court. The said notification reads as under:

G.S.R.570(E) – In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of Section 22 of the Passports Act 1967 (15 of 1967) and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of External Affairs No. G.S.R.298(E), dated the 14th April, 1976, the Central Government, being of the opinion that it is necess