JUDGMENT:

(Per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Alok Aradhe)

Mr. Katta Shiva Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant.

Ms. N.V.R.Rajya Lakshmi, learned counsel representing Mr. Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India respondent Nos.1 and 2.

2. This intra court appeal has been filed against the order dated 08.04.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.9063 of 2024, by which the writ petition preferred by the appellant has been disposed of.

3. Facts giving rise to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that the appellant had filed an application on 16.06.2023 for reissuing of his passport. The Regional Passport Officer is not considering the said application on the ground that three criminal cases, namely C.C.Nos.1334 of 2018, 158 of 2019 and 3382 of 2019 are pending against the appellant. The appellant challenged the aforesaid action of respondent No.2 in not reissuing the passport of the appellant pursuant to his application dated

16.06.2023.

4. The learned Single Judge, by an order dated

08.04.2024, has disposed of the writ petition with the direction to the Regional Passport Officer to pass appropriate orders and has imposed a condition on the appellant that the appellant shall deposit the newly reissued passport before the trial court and shall not leave the country without the leave of the Court. The appellant is aggrieved by the aforesaid condition and has filed this intra court appeal.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the condition of deposit of the passport is an onerous condition and the same may be relaxed, as the same has been imposed only in this case.

6. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant and have perused the record.

7. The scope of this appeal is confined to examine the validity of the conditions imposed by the learned Single Judge. The said conditions read as under:

“(i) The petitioner herein shall submit an undertaking along with an affidavit in C.C.No.1334 of 2018, C.C.No.158 of 2019 pending on the file XIII MM Court at Rajendranagar and C.C.No.3382 of 2019 pending on the file V MM Court, Ranga Reddy at L.B.Nagar stating that he shall not leave India during pendency of the said C.C’s without permission of the Court and that he shall co-operate with trial Court in concluding the proceedings in the said C.C’s.

ii) On filing such an undertaking as well as affidavit, the trial Court shall issue a certified copy of the same within two (02) weeks there from;

iii) The petitioner herein shall submit an application afresh along with certified copy of this order as well as the aforesaid undertaking before the Passport Officer/Authority concerned for reissuance of passport;

iv) On filing such an application, the Passport Officer/Authority shall consider the same afresh in the light of the observations made by this Court herein as well as the contents of the undertaking given by the petitioner for reissuance of passport, in accordance with law, within three (03) weeks from the date of said application;

v) Respondent No.2 shall consider Rule 12 of the Passport Rules, 1967 while considering the aforesaid application submitted by the petitioner.

vi) On reissuance of the Passport, the petitioner herein shall deposit the same before the trial Court in C.C.No.1334 of 2018 and C.C.No.158 of 2019 pending on the file XIII MM Court at Rajendranagar; and vii) However, liberty is granted to the petitioner herein to file an application before the learned Magistrate seeking permission to travel abroad, and it is for the learned Magistrate to consider the same in accordance with law.”

8. The aforesaid conditions have been imposed with a view to secure the presence of the appellant in the criminal cases. The said conditions, by no stretch of imagination, can be said to be unreasonable.

9. For the aforementioned reasons, we do not find any merit in the appeal. The same is hereby dismissed.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be n