Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Sri. Chandana Venkata Raghu ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 22 June, 2022
Bench: R Raghunandan Rao
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
WRIT PETITION No.7714 of 2022
ORDER:
The petitioner, who is a passport holder bearing
No.J5114129 had sought renewal of the said passport on its
expiry on 23.02.2021. However, the 3rd respondent did not
renew the said passport. Aggrieved by the said non-renewal,
the petitioner has approached this Court, by way of the
present writ petition.
2. It transpires that a complaint had been lodged
against the petitioner, by his wife, under Section 498-A of
I.P.C and the same was registered as Crime No.243 of 2019 in
III Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam. It appears that the 3 rd
respondent had refused to renew the passport on the ground
that a crime was registered against the petitioner.
3. The learned Government Pleader for Home, on
instructions, submits that originally three persons were
involved as accused in the crime. After investigation, a charge
sheet has been filed before the IV Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam setting out charges
against the petitioner only and absolving the other two
persons against any charges. This charge sheet appears to
have been returned on some objections and has now been
resubmitted and is pending before the Court.
4. In view of the submissions of the learned
Government Pleader, it is clear that the learned Magistrate has
not yet taken cognizance on the basis of the charge sheet and
is still treated as Crime No.243 of 2019.
5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in its
Judgment dated 27.09.2021 in Crl.A.No.1342 of 2017 in the
case of Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu vs. Central Bureau
of Investigation. The Hon'ble Supreme Court after
considering Section (2)(f) of the Passport Act had held that the
passport authority cannot refuse renewal of the passport on
the ground of pendency of a criminal appeal and directed the
passport authority to renew the passport.
The issue and renewal of passports is regulated by the
Passport Act, 1967. Section 6(2), it is extracted below is
relevant for this purpose.
(2) subject to the other provisions of this Act, the passport
authority shall refuse to issue a passport or travel document for
visiting any foreign country under clause (c) of sub-section (2) of
Section 5 on any one or more of the following grounds, and on no
other ground, namely:-
(a) that the applicant is not a citizen of India.,
(b) that the applicant may, or is likely to, engage outside India
in activities prejudicial to the sovereignty and integrity of
India.,
(c) that the departure of the applicant from India may, or is
likely to, be detrimental to the security of India.,
(d) that the presence of the applicant outside India may, or is
likely to, prejudice the friendly relations of India with any
foreign country.,
(e) that the applicant has, at any time during the period of
five years immediately preceding the date of his application,
been convicted by a Court in India for any offence involving
moral turpitude and sentenced in respect thereof to
imprisonment for not less than two years.,
(f) that proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have
been committed by the applicant are pending before a
criminal court of India.,
(g) that a warrant or summons for the appearance, or a
warrant for the arrest, of the applicant has been issued by a
Court under any law for the time being in force or that an
order prohibiting the departure from India of the applicant
has been made by any such court.,
(h) that the applicant has been repatriated and has not
reimbursed the expenditure incurred in connection with such
repatriation.,
(i) that in the opinion of the Central Government the issue of
a passport or travel document to the applicant will not be in
the public interest.
The grounds on which, the renewal of the passport of
the petitioner is being refused could at best fall within Section
2(f) of the Passport Act. This provision has been considered in
various cases and the ambit of this provision is fairly settled.
6. A learned Single Judge of the High Court at
Madras dated 04.02.2021 in W.P.No.20058 of 2020 held that
mere pendency of a First Information Report cannot be the
legal basis for denial of issuance of a regular passport to the
petitioner and that it is only after cognizance is taken by
appropriate Court that it can be held that criminal
proceedings have commenced and issuance or renewal of the
passport would be depend on no objection being given by the
concerned Court.
7. The Central Government has also issued
G.S.R.No.570(E), dated 25.08.1993 stipulating that a no
objection order would be required from a Court only if it falls
within the ambit of Section 6(2)(f).
8. In view of the fact that Section 6(2)(f) would arise
only when there is a pending proceeding before the Criminal
Court after cognizance is taken, it would have to be held that
as of now there is no pending criminal proceeding before the
Court.
9. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a
direction to the 3rd respondent to consider the application of
the petitioner, for renewal of his passport, without raising any
objection relating to the pendency of Crime No.243 of 2019 in
III Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam. There shall be no
order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand
closed.
___________________________________
JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
Date : 22-06-2022
RJS
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
WRIT PETITION No.7714 of 2022
Date : 22.06.2022
RJS
