THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.29663 OF 2025

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed with the following relief:

“Issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of 2^nd respondent in issuing a letter dated 03.09.205, as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and against the principles of natural justice and also in violation of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and also in contravention of Apex Court judgment in Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu v. Central Bureau of Investigation and consequently direct the 2^nd respondent to consider the application of the petitioner for issuance of Passport to the petitioner as per law……...”

2.1. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the present Writ Petition has been instituted being aggrieved by the communication dated 03.09.2025 issued by the respondent No.2/the Regional Passport Officer (RPO), whereby the petitioner’s request for renewal of his passport was withheld on the ground of the pendency of a criminal case.

2.2. It is further averred that, in response to the RPO’s communication dated 03.09.2025, the petitioner submitted a detailed reply on 19.09.2025, asserting that the criminal case registered against him was false and vindictive in nature, and that the matter was likely to be amicably settled before the Lok Adalat. He further stated that he possesses no criminal antecedents, has maintained a good travel record, and seeks renewal of his passport to undertake religious travel to Saudi Arabia. However, it is contended that the RPO, without duly considering the explanation furnished, informed the petitioner that unless the pending criminal case was quashed or the petitioner was acquitted, his passport could not be renewed. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking appropriate relief.

3.1. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further contends that the issue raised herein is no longer res integra. He draws the attention of this Court to the judgment rendered in Ashith Ragi v. Union of India, represented by the Secretary to Government, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi (W.P. No. 11927 of 2025, decided on 24.04.2025), wherein this Court categorically held that refusal to issue or renew a passport solely on the ground of pendency of a criminal case, in the absence of conviction, is arbitrary and contrary to law.

3.2. Reliance is also placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu v. Central Bureau of Investigation [(2020) Crl. L.J. (SC) 572], wherein the Apex Court held that the mere pendency of criminal proceedings cannot, by itself, operate as an absolute bar to the issuance or renewal of a passport, unless the competent criminal court has specifically restricted the applicant’s right to obtain one.

3.3. On the strength of these judicial pronouncements, learned counsel submits that the action of respondent No.2/RPO in withholding the renewal of the petitioner’s passport merely due to the pendency of a criminal case is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. He, therefore, prays that this Court may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to renew the petitioner’s passport in accordance with law.

4. I have carefully perused the material on record.

5. The petitioner’s application for renewal of passport was withheld by respondent No.2/RPO on the ground that a criminal case, bearing Crime No. 399 of 2018, is pending against him before the IX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, arising out of Narayanaguda Police Station.

6. The petitioner asserts that despite his reply dated 10.09.2025 to the RPO, he was informed that renewal of his passport could be considered only upon production of a final judgment of acquittal, thereby imposing a precondition not warranted by law. However, from the pleadings, it is evident that no formal or reasoned order has