ORAL ORDER:

Heard Mr. M.Phanindra Bhargav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.G.Venkateshwarlu, learned Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

2. Perusal of the record would reveal that the petitioner herein is a holder of Passport bearing No.H.5330902 which was issued on 20.10.2009 and the same was expired by 19.10.2019. He had submitted online application No.22-1007395361 dated 02.07.2022 by paying necessary fee for renewal of his passport and he was directed to report on 11.08.2022 at 3.00 p.m. When he reported before respondent No.2, he was informed that his passport will not be renewed on account of submission of report by the police stating that C.C. No.18 of 2020 is pending.

3. Perusal of the record would reveal that Crime No.203 of

2017 was registered against him by CCS, DD, Hyderabad Police Station for the offences under Sections – 406, 420 read with 34 of IPC and Section 76 of Chit Funds Act, 1982, Section – 5 of AP Protection of Depositor of Financial Establishment Act, and after completion of investigation, the police filed charge sheet. The same was taken on file vide C.C. No.18 of 2020 pending on the file of learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad at Nampally. Thus, respondent No.2 is not renewing his passport on the ground of pendency of the aforesaid criminal case.

4. The petitioner herein is arraigned as accused No.2 in the aforesaid C.C. Now, he contends that he was falsely implicated in the aforesaid crime. Further, he is also ready to co-operate with the trial court in concluding trial in the said C.C. Therefore, he sought to issue necessary directions to respondent No.2 for consideration of his application to renew his passport.

5. It is also relevant to note that the Apex Court in Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu v. CentralBureau of Investigation1 had an occasion to examine the provisions of the Passports Act, pendency of criminal cases and held that refusal of a passport can be only in case where an applicant is convicted during the period of five (05) years immediately preceding the date of application for an offence involving moral turpitude and sentence for imprisonment for not less than two years. Section 6.2 (f) relates to a situation where the applicant is facing trial in a criminal Court. The petitioner therein was convicted

1. 2020 Crl.L.J. (SC) 572

in a case for the offences under Sections - 420, 468, 471 and 477A read with 120B of the IPC and also Section - 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Against which, an appeal was filed and the same was dismissed. The sentence was reduced to a period of one (01) year. The petitioner therein had approached the Apex Court by way of filing an appeal and the same is pending. Therefore, considering the said facts, the Apex Court held that Passport Authority cannot refuse renewal of the passport on the ground of pendency of the criminal appeal. Thus, the Apex Court directed the Passport Authority to renew the passport of the applicant without raising the objection relating to the pendency of the aforesaid criminal appeal in S.C.

6. As discussed above, the aforesaid criminal case is pending against the petitioner herein. The passport of the petitioner was valid up to 19.10.2019. He had submitted the aforesaid online application on 02.07.2022 for renewal of his passport. Respondent No.2 is not considering the application for renewal of the same on the ground of pendency of the aforesaid criminal case. On the ground of pendency of the proceedings in criminal case, the respondent cannot deny renewal of passport of the petitioner herein. There is no provision in the Passports Act or Rules/ Regulations that passport cannot be renewed on the ground of pendency of criminal case. Further, the petitioner herein is standing on better footing than the petitioner in Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu1. In view of the same, respondent No.2 cannot deny or refuse to renew the passport of the petitioner. However, if the pe