HON’BLE SMT JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA WRI T PETI TI ON No.31292 of 2023

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri N.Hari Prasad, learned counsel appearing for respondents.

2. The prayer as sought for by the petitioner in the present w rit petition reads as under:

“to issue appropriate writ order or direction more in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in declining to renew the petitioners passport bearing No.M1076380 pursuant to his application No.HY75C5086369523 dt. 09/09/2023 as illegal arbitrary and consequentially direct the 2nd respondent follow the circular guidelines issued in GSR 570 (E) dt. 25/08/1993 Ministry of External Affairs Government of India and pass.”

PERUSED THE RECORD

3. A perusal of the record would reveal that the petitioner herein is an accused in Crime No.717 of 2020, for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 504 and 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC and after completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer had filed charge sheet. The same was taken on file vide C.C.No.817 of 2021 before the learned XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Medchal and petitioner is also accused in another criminal case vide FIR No.385 of 2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 447 and 427 of IPC and after completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer had filed charge sheet. The same was taken on file vide CC.No.582 of 2021 before the learned XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Medchal.

4. The specific case of the petitioner is that petitioner holds a valid passport bearing No.M1076380 and the same was valid upto 17.08.2024. Further, the petitioner in advance submitted an application before the 2^nd respondent bearing No.HY75C5086369523, dated 09.09.2023 for renewal of his passport by paying requisite fee. However, the same has been kept pending by the 2^nd respondent without any valid reason till date. On enquiry with 2^nd respondent website, the petitioner came to know that the police report is not clear and application dated 09.09.2023 is under review at Regional Passport Office from the past one month.

5. Further, the case of the petitioner is that the 2^nd respondent stated orally that because the said FIRs are pending, the 2^nd respondent refused to renew the application of the petitioner.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner herein was falsely implicated in the aforesaid crimes. Further, that the petitioner is also ready to co-operate with the trial. Therefore, the petitioner sought to issue necessary directions to the respondents for consideration of his application for renewal of his passport.

7. Respondent No.2 cannot deny renewal of Passport on the ground that aforesaid Criminal Cases are pending against him. It is also relevant to note that the Apex Court in Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu v. Central Bureau of I nvestigation, [1. 2020 Crl.L.J. (SC) 572] 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 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 crimin