THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.11867 OF 2025

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.782 of 2025 in C.C.No.511 of 2015, dated 24.06.2025 on the file of leaned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hyderabad (for short ‘trial Court’).

2. Heard the submissions of Sri Madhav Khurana, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 – State.

3. The learned petitioner counsel has submitted that his passport was to be renewed and therefore, he filed a Crl.M.P.No.782 of 2025 before the trial Court and it was ordered in his favour, but only condition imposed was that he was not supposed to travel abroad. Just because of that rider in the order, the Passport authorities has refused to renew his passport and hence, he is aggrieved by the said order and therefore, prayed to remove the said condition in the order dated 24.06.2025. He further submitted that he has been travelling many a times, during the pendency of this case. He has submitted the dates and his visits to the several countries, which discloses that he has travelled 28 times altogether from 2015 to 2024 to several countries and that he has always been cooperating with the Court and has not violated any orders so far and on all these occasions, there was no prior permission required for the said travel. But now since the passport was required to the renewed, he has approached the Court and the Court, while allowing his application, has imposed this condition not allowing him to travel aboard and that it would cause loss, both on his personal and official obligations, if his passport is not renewed, his Fundamental Right would get affected. He therefore, prayed to set aside the said condition imposed in the orders dated 24.06.2025 by the trial Court.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the petitioner has filed another petition seeking permission to travel abroad, but it is pending before the trial Court and the Supreme Court has stayed all further proceedings. Therefore, the said petition also would be stayed and hence, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has replied submitting that the orders in the Crl.M.P.No.782 of 2025 were passed prior to the orders of the Supreme Court, but subsequently he has approached the Supreme Court, wherein the stay was granted, staying in all further proceedings before the trial Court.

6. Perused the record.

7. A perusal of the record discloses that the stay orders granted by the Supreme Court are dated 22.08.2025, the impugned order is dated 24.06.2025. It is further disclosed that the other petition filed by the petitioner herein for seeking permission to travel, is pending before the trial Court. Since there is a stay order granted by the Supreme Court, the trial Court cannot adjudicate any of the said petitions right now. The petitioner has also filed a copy of the order of Ministry of External Affairs, Regional Passport Office, Ghaziabad, where under the passport authorities have rejected the renewal of his passport, observing that:-

(9):- “It is essential to mention that a passport functions as a travel document and is required for any Indian citizen wishing to travel abroad. Therefore, whenever you intend to travel abroad, you should submit your passport application to the Passport Authority, along with the requisite permission from the concerned Court to depart from India, particularly if criminal proceedings continue to remain pending at the time of your application.”

8. It is further mentioned in the orders that if he is not satisfied with the decision of the passport authority, he may prefer an appeal under Section 11 of the Passport Act, 1967 before the appellate authority, i.e., the Joint Secretary, PSP and CPO, Ministry of External Affairs, within 60 days from the issuance of the order. The said