##PAGE1##

2026:APHC:5516

APHC010711712025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3327]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY

WRIT PETITION NO: 170/2026

Between:

1. ABDUL MASTAN SHAIK, S/O. ABDUL JABBAR SHAIK,

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT D.NO. 17-411,

NVR STREET, MADANAPALLE, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.

ANDHRA PRADESH.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REP BY ITS SECRETARY

MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS SHASTRY BHAVAN,

NEW DELHI,

2. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL

PASSPORT OFFICE, 4TH FLOOR, STALIN CENTRAL,

D.NO.27-37-158, GOVERNMENT, M.G.ROAD,

VIJAYAWADA.

3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, RAYACHOTY,

ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. VUBBARA DUSHYANTH REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR HOME

2. TENEPALLI NIRANJAN ( SC FOR CENT GOVT) )

The Court made the following:

SRK, J

W.P.No.170 of 2026

2 2026:APHC:5516

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY

WRIT PETITION NO: 170 of 2026

O R D E R:

This Writ Petition was filed seeking the following relief:

to issue a Writ, Order or direction more

“…

particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Writ of

Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd

respondent in not renewing the petitioners

passport bearing No. M2270688 pursuant to the

application vide File No.VJ1077183456324 dated

05.12.2024 and releasing/issuing the Petitioner as

illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of Natural

Justice and also violate of Article 14 of the

Constitution of India and also contrary to the

provisions and rules The Passport Act, 1967 and

consequently direct the respondents to forthwith

renew and issue the passport to the petitioner and

pass

…”

2. Contents of the affidavit filed by the Writ Petitioner, in brief,

are that the Writ Petitioner obtained Passport bearing

No.M2270688 and it is valid from 09.02.2016 to 22.09.2024; and

he intends to visit United States of America; that as the Writ

Petitioner’s passport expired on 22.09.2024, he made an

application on 05.12.2024 vide Application No.VJ1077183456324

for renewal/reissue passport with 2^nd respondent authority along

with all requisite documents, but 2^nd respondent sent a letter dated

09.12.2024 to the Writ Petitioner stating that a case in Crime

SRK, J

W.P.No.170 of 2026

3 2026:APHC:5516

No.113 of 2022 of Madanapalle I Town Police Station for the

offences punishable under Sections 143 and 341 read with 149

IPC was registered against him and the said case is taken on file

as Calendar Case No.1144 of 2022 pending on the file of the II

Additional Junior Civil Judge, Madanapalle. The said criminal case

does not involve any allegation of violence, fraud, moral turpitude,

national security, public order or international ramifications; that

the Writ Petitioner was arrayed as accused without attribution of

any specific overt act and merely on suspicion; that mere

pendency of a criminal case cannot be treated as an automatic

disqualification for renewal or reissuance of a Passport. Hence,

the Writ Petition.

3. During arguments, learned counsel for the Writ Petitioner

reiterated the contentions raised in the Writ Petition affidavit.

4. Sri Venna Hemanth Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for

the Central Government appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2

would contend that the Writ Petitioner suppressed the fact of

registration of FIR in Crime No.113 of 2022 of Madanapalle I

Town Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections

143 and 341 read with 149 IPC and after completion of

investigation, police filed charge sheet and it was taken on file as

SRK, J

W.P.No.170 of 2026

4 2026:APHC:5516

Calendar Case No.1144 of 2022 pending on the file of the II

Additional Junior Civil Judge, Madanapalle. The Writ Petitioner

was called upon, to furnish proper explanation regarding the

circumstances under which he had suppressed the material

information in the application.

5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for

respondent No.3 reiterated the