THE HON’BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner-accused No.1 seeking to quash the order dated 01.09.2025 passed in Crl.M.P. No.342 in CC No.571 of 2021 by the VII Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Hayathnagar, Ranga Reddy District, wherein the petition filed by him seeking permission for renewal of the passport, was dismissed.

2. Heard Mr. P. Vamsheedhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent No.1-State.

3. The case of the petitioner is that his passport bearing No.N8124597 is issued on 29.02.2016 and is expiring on 28.02.2026 and thus, he sought permission of the court to get his passport renewed and that he filed a petition before the trial court but, the trial court has dismissed the same. He further submitted that the trial court ought to have allowed petition and that unless the permission is given by the court, the passport authorities would not renew his passport by which his rights would be prejudiced. He further submitted that since there is stay of all further proceedings granted by this Court vide order dated 11.07.2025, in this case, the trial court has not granted any order with regard to renewal of the passport. He therefore, prayed to set aside the orders of the trial court.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the stay order is in force and hence, the trial court has rightly dismissed the petition.

5. Perused the record.

6. The present petition is filed seeking renewal of passport, but this Court has granted stay of all further proceedings in the case before the trial court vide order dated 11.07.2025. The trial court has observed the same and held that it is not inclined to grant any orders pertaining to renewal of the passport and has further held that passing any order would be contempt of the High Court’s orders. However, it has discussed the merits of the petition and has held that Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act does not apply to the present case as the passport authority neither refused to issue passport nor refused to issue travel documents to the petitioner herein.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner has filed the official memorandum dated 10.10.2019 issued by the Government of India wherein it is mentioned at point No.2(c) as follows:

“2. GSR 570(E) dated 25.8.1993 is reproduced below for reference:

GSR 570(E) - In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of Section 22 of the Passports Act, 1967 (15 of 1967) and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of External Affairs No. GSR 298(E) dated the 14th April 1976, the Central Government, being of the opinion that it is necessary in public interest to do so, hereby exempts citizens of India against whom proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by them are pending before a criminal court in India and who produce orders from the court concerned permitting them to depart from India, from the operation of the provisions of Clause (f) of sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the said Act, subject to the following conditions, namely:-

(a) xxxx (i)…. (ii)…. (iii)….

(b) xxxx (c) any passport issued in terms of (a)(i) above can be further renewed only on the basis of a fresh court order specifying a further period of validity of the passport or specifying a period for travel abroad;”

8. Thus, it is made clear from the official memorandum that when there are criminal proceedings against an individual, he has to seek permission of the court for renewal of the passport. The petitioner herein has further received a communication from the Regional Passport Office on 02.09.2025 expressing its objections with reference to the passport application of the petitioner and the authority has observed as follows:

“1) Charged with criminal proceeding or any arrest warrant/summon pending;

The applicant involved in crime number 1030/2019 un