IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.2644 of 2026

10.03.2026 Between:

Donthi Ranjith Kumar …Petitioner AND The Union of India, Represented by its Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, Patiala House Court Compound, New Delhi and 3 others.

…Respondents

ORDER:

The petitioner made an application to the respondent-Passport authority seeking renewal of passport vide application No.25- 2055183085; however, the passport authority refused to renew the same on the ground that the police verification revealed adverse report stating that criminal proceedings are pending against the petitioner vide C.C.No.990 of 2024 on the file of learned Principal Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Rajanna Sircilla.

2. Heard Sri Mahesh Mamindla, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt NVR.Rajya Lakshmi, learned Standing Counsel for Central Government representing Sri N.Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri T.Lakshmi Narayana, learned counsel for respondent No.4. Perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that mere arraignment of the petitioner in a criminal case cannot be a ground for denial of passport. Therefore, he seeks renewal of the said passport without reference to the pendency of criminal case.

4. Learned Standing Counsel for Central Government relies on the judgment of the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.194 of

2026, dated 17.02.2026.

5. Learned Standing Counsel, by referring to Office Memorandum dated 10.10.2019 issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, submits that in view of the pending criminal proceedings against the petitioner, the petitioner is required to approach the concerned trial Court for necessary NOC/permission to obtain passport, and thereafter furnish the same before the passport authority for considering issuance of passport. In the instant case, the petitioner has not furnished NOC/permission from the trial Court and therefore there is no illegality in refusing to renew the passport.

6. Having considered the respective submissions, at the outset, it is settled law that mere pendency of criminal proceedings cannot be a ground to refuse issuance of passport. In this connection, it is relevant to refer to the orders passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.194 of 2026, dated 17.02.2026, wherein the Division Bench has observed as follows:

“13. In the light of the principle laid down by the Apex Court concerning the interpretation of GSR 570(E) dated 25.08.1993 and Office Memorandum dated 10.10.2019, we are of the considered view that the appellant should make an application for seeking NOC from the concerned trial courts where criminal cases are pending against him. It is upon issuance of NOC that the appellant should file an application for renewal of the passport. In case the courts prescribe a period for which the passport is to be issued, the passport authority should honour that period. Otherwise, if it does not stipulate any period, the notification provides default rules, including issuance for a shorter period, ordinarily one year, in appropriate cases.”

7. In the instant case, there is no material placed on record to show that the petitioner filed an application before the concerned trial Court seeking a “No Objection Certificate” for obtaining of passport. In view of the pending criminal proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.990 of 2024 on the file of learned Principal Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Rajanna Sircilla, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the petitioner to approach the court of learned Principal Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Rajanna Sircilla and make an appropriate application seeking a “No Objection Certificate” for obtaining passport. Upon filing such application, the concerned trial Court shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders expeditiously, preferably within one week from the date of