SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 14127

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
K SREENIVASA REDDY
Bhimanadham Bharat Reddy – Appellant
Versus
The Union Government of India – Respondent
WP 2125/2026



##PAGE1##

2026:APHC:7231

APHC010031972026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3327]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY

WRIT PETITION NO: 2125/2026

Between:

1. BHIMANADHAM BHARAT REDDY,, S/O BHIMANADHAM

BHASKAR REDDY AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O. H.NO.

8-24-34 SIMS GROUP OF INSTITUTIONS, MANGALDAS

NAGAR, GUNTUR-522001, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. THE UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, REP BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL

AFFAIRS SOUTH BLOCK, SECRETARIAT, RAISINA HILL,

NEW DELHI, INDIA.

2. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL

PASSPORT OFIFCE, GJ3M PLUS X9M, VENKATESWARA

THEATRE COMPLEX, MG RD, OPP. RADIO STATION,

VIJAYAWADA ANDHRA PRADESH 520610

...RESPONDENT(S):

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. PILLIX LAW FIRM

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. MALLAMPALLI SRINIVAS(CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL)

The Court made the following:

##PAGE2##

SRK, J

W.P.No.2125 of 2026

2 2026:APHC:7231

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY

WRIT PETITION NO: 2125 of 2026

O R D E R:

This Writ Petition was filed seeking the following relief:

to issue a writ, order, more particularly

“…

one in the nature of writ of mandamus by declaring

the action of respondent no. 2 in renewing the

petitioner's passport for a period of 1 year instead

of a period of 10 years pursuant to the order/NOC

dated 20-11-2025 in CRLMP.No.1008/2025 in

SC.No.125/S/2022 of Hon'ble IV Addl. Sessions

judge-cum-special judge for trial of cases under SC

and ST(prevention of atrocities) ACT, 1989 for his

renewal Application Reference No. (ARN) 25-

1055464589 dated 01-07-2025 as illegal, arbitrary

and against Article 14 and 21 of our Indian

Constitution, and consequently to direct

respondent no.2 to renew the passport of the

petitioner for a period of 10 years to the petitioner

on his Application Reference No (ARN). 25-

1055464589 dated 01-07- 2025

…”

2. Case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner herein is

the Director-cum-Chairman of the Southern Indian Institute of

Medical Sciences. The said Institution has a number of branches

all over the State of Andhra Pradesh. The petitioner is now

planning to expand across the country by approaching

international institutions to recruit staff from colleges outside India

so as to meet higher standards of education. The petitioner

##PAGE3##

SRK, J

W.P.No.2125 of 2026

3 2026:APHC:7231

proposes to engage Ph.D. holders for his institution by

approaching them in different countries to conduct classes in his

institutions. In order to meet the said requirements, the petitioner

approached respondent No. 2 for renewal of his passport.

However, respondent No. 2 renewed the passport of the petitioner

only for a validity period of one year despite the directions issued

by the learned IV Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge

for Trial of Cases under the SCs and STs (PoA) Act, Guntur, in

Crl.M.P. No. 1008 of 2025 in S.C. No. 125 of 2022. The petitioner

herein filed the said application before the learned Special Judge

seeking renewal of the passport for a period of ten years, and the

learned Special Judge, after considering the submissions made

and the material on record, directed the Regional Passport Officer

to renew the passport of the petitioner. Be that as it may, the

passport authorities have renewed the passport of the petitioner

only for a period of one year under the guise of a pending criminal

case against the petitioner. Hence, the present Writ Petition is

filed seeking renewal of the petitioner’s passport for a period of

ten years.

3. During arguments, learned counsel for the Writ Petitioner

reiterated the contentions raised in the Writ Petition affidavit.

##PAGE4##

SRK, J

W.P.No.2125 of 2026

4 2026:APHC:7231

4. Learned Standing Counsel for the Central Government

appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 would contend that the

offences alleged against the Writ Petitioner are under Sections

323 and 341 of the IPC and Sections 3(1)(r) of the SCs and the

STs (PoA) Act and, if the Passport of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top