HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.21043 of 2025

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.N.V.R.Rajya Lakshmi, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondents. With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is being taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:- “to declare the inaction of the Respondents in not issuing the Passport to the Petitioner and by refusing application vide File No.HY2075032215125 dated 14.05.2025 and passport service to the Petitioner on account of pending criminal case against the Petitioner vide CC.No.2398 of 2020 (CC No.2396 of 2020) on the file of the Honble XXII ACMM, Secunderabad, as being illegal, arbitrary and highhanded apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to law laid down by the various Hon’ble High Courts and consequently direct the Respondents to renew the passport to the Petitioner on expeditious basis by fixing time for 10 years.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner on expiry of his passport bearing No.J9834679, had applied for renewal vide application No.HY2075032215125 dated 14.05.2025, wherein the petitioner had disclosed the details about the pendency of C.C.No.2398 of 2020, on the file of XXII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad. It is further submitted that the respondent No.2 issued impugned letter dated 23.06.2025, directing the ‘petitioner to submits acquittal orders or obtain permission to depart from India from the same Court wherein the criminal proceeding are still pending’. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu v. Central Bureau of Investigation1 held that the passport authority cannot refuse to issue passport on the ground of pendency of criminal appeal and pray this Court to direct respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner and renew the passport in a time bound period.

5. Learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondents did not dispute the same.

6. Recording the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner and take steps for release of the passport in due compliance of the findings of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu v. Central Bureau of Investigation. The directions are as follows:

(i) The petitioner shall submit an undertaking along with an affidavit before the XXII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad, stating that the petitioner will not leave India during pendency of the said C.C. without permission of the Court and the petitioner will cooperate with the Trial Court in concluding the criminal proceedings.

(ii) The Trial Court shall issue a certified copy of the undertaking along with an certified copy of the Affidavit filed in C.C.No.2398 of 2020 within Two (2) weeks from the date of filing of the undertaking.

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

(iii) The petitioner shall submit the certified copy of the aforesaid undertaking and Affidavit along with the reply/explanation before the concerned Passport Officer for consideration of his application for passport.

(iv) The Passport Authority shall consider the documents in the light of the observations made by the Court as well as the undertaking and other documents filed by the petitioner. The petitioner shall also be at liberty to rely on the decisions in this regard.

(v) The Passport authority is directed to issue the passport of the petitioner without raising the objection relating to the pendency of the criminal proceedings before the Trial Court.

(vi) The petitioner shall deposit the original passport before the the XXII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secundera