Telangana High Court
Sirangi Muralidhar Rao vs Union Of India, on 3 July, 2024
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.16769 of 2024
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed praying this Court to declare the action of respondent No.2 in not issuing passport to the petitioner for ten years in spite of application Ref.No.(ARN) 24-1007987017, dated 24.06.2024 in the place of old passport No.Y6818246, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unconstitutional and consequently, direct the respondents to issue passport to the petitioner for a period of ten years and for other appropriate reliefs.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he is the holder of Indian passport bearing No.Y6818246 issued by the passport authorities on 18.10.2006 and the same was valid up to 17.10.2016. It is the further case of the petitioner that his marriage was performed with one Munnuru Shobha in the year, 2014 and thereafter disputes arose between him and his wife. Acting on the complaint lodged by the wife of the petitioner, a case in Crime No.843 of 2014 was registered against him for the offences punishable 2 CVBR, J Wp_16769_2024 under Section 498-A of I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and after completion of the investigation, charge sheet was laid before the XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Medchal and the said charge sheet was taken cognizance as C.C.No246 of 2017. Pending adjudication of the said criminal case, the petitioner has made an application seeking renewal of his passport and when the respondents have not considered his application, he was constrained to file W.P.No.14393 of 2023. This Court, vide order, dated 13.06.2023, disposed of the said writ petition directing the petitioner to file an undertaking along with an affidavit before the learned XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Medchal in C.C.No.246 of 2017 stating that he shall not leave India during pendency of the said C.C. without permission of the Court and that he shall co-operate with the trial Court in concluding the proceedings in the said C.C. It is the further case of the petitioner that in compliance with the orders passed by this Court, the respondents have re- issued the passport for a period of one year which is valid from 07.07.2023 to 06.07.2024 and since the petitioner is 3 CVBR, J Wp_16769_2024 entitled for renewal of his passport for a period of ten years, he made an application, dated 24.06.2024 seeking renewal of the passport issued on 07.07.2023 for a period of ten years. The grievance of the petitioner is that acting on the said application, a notice was issued to the petitioner to be present on 19.07.2024 and pending consideration of the said application, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition stating that the respondents are not considering his application for renewal of his passport for a period of ten years and anticipated that they renew his passport for one year and the said action on the part of the respondents amounts to violation of the Rule 12 (1) of the Passport Rules, 1980 (for short "the Rules).
3. Sri G.Arun Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that there is an occasion to consider the provisions of notification bearing No.GSR- 570(E), dated 25.08.1993, wherein the instructions were issued to renew the passport only for a period of one year, in case, if no time is mentioned by the Courts and this Court duly taking into consideration of the notification bearing No.GSR-570(E), dated 25.08.1993 and the Office 4 CVBR, J Wp_16769_2024 Memorandum bearing No.VI/401/1/5/2019, dated 10.10.2019 has directed the passport authorities to renew the passport for a period of ten years in accordance with Rule 12 of the Rules. Learned counsel further submits that even after the orders being passed by this Court in W.P.No. 14393 of 2023, dated 13.06.2023, the respondents are renewing the passport for a period of one year only relying upon the notification No.GSR-570(E), dated 25.08.1993 and they are not implementing the orders passed by this Court.
4. Ms.B.Kavitha Yadav, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents, relying upon the instructions furnished by the respondents and also the judgment of the High Court of Judicature of Bombay in W.P.(L) No.1576 of 2024, dated 08.04.2024, would submit that if the petitioner is aggrieved with the action of renewing his passport for a period of one year, he would be required to make an application for reissuance of passport before the criminal Court where the case is pending. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that the writ petition is 5 CVBR, J Wp_16769_2024 liable to be dismissed as premature since the petitioner has to appear before the passport authority on 19.07.2024.
5. A careful examination of the contents of the affidavit would reveal that the passport of the petitioner was not renewed on the ground of the criminal case pending vide C.C.No.246 of 2017 and questioning the said action, the petitioner filed W.P.No.14393 of 2023 which was disposed of on 13.06.2023 directing the petitioner to file an affidavit in pending criminal case and also to seek permission of the Court as and when he wants to travel abroad. This Court also imposed a condition that the petitioner shall deposit the original renewed passport in C.C.No.246 of 2017 pending on the file of learned XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Medchal. Since there is a specific direction to deposit the passport in C.C.No.246 of 2017, the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioner is not entitled for renewal of his passport for a period of ten years is untenable. As per Rule 12 (1) of the Rules, the petitioner is entitled for renewal of the passport for a period of ten years and therefore, the respondents are directed to renew the passport of the petitioner for a period 6 CVBR, J Wp_16769_2024 of ten years and after reissue/renewal of the same for a period of ten years, the petitioner is directed to deposit the said original renewed passport in C.C.No.246 of 2017 on the file of learned XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Medchal and if the petitioner intends to travel abroad, he is permitted to make appropriate application for release of the said passport before the Court concerned.
6. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
7. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________________ JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY 03.07.2024 gkv