Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Margani Satyanarayana vs Union Of India on 21 September, 2022
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
WRIT PETITION No.22717 of 2022
ORDER:-
The petitioner is the holder of passport bearing
No.J9212210, issued on 25.10.2011, had sought renewal of the
said passport, by way of an application bearing ARN No.22-
1000958147 dated 28.01.2022, to the 3rd respondent and the
said application has been given File No.VS6074004809922
dated 04.03.2022. As this application was not being disposed of
by the respondents 1 to 3, the petitioner has approached this
Court, by way of the present writ petition.
2. The petitioner has also stated that he had been
arrayed as Accused No.11 in Crime No.483 of 2021, registered
in the 4th respondent-Kadiam Police Station, Rajahmundry,
under Sections 188, 341, 353 r/w 34 of IPC and Section 3 of the
Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897. He contends that the allegations
made against him in the said complaint are untrue and false.
3. Sri Prakasam learned counsel, appearing for
Smt.B.Srilatha learned counsel for the petitioner contends that
apart from the fact that the allegations are untrue, the refusal to
grant renewal of the passport is not in accordance with the
provisions of the Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act in as much
as mere pendency of a complaint filed against the petitioner is
not sufficient to refuse renewal of the passport to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Pleader for Home has
obtained written instructions from the Inspector of Police,
Kadiam Police Station dated 09.09.2022. In these written
instructions it is stated that the petitioner had been served with
a notice under Section 41A of Criminal Procedure Code for
appearing before the Investigating Officer and the said case is
pending investigation.
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, after considering Section 6(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.
6. The issue and renewal of passports is regulated by
the Passport Act, 1967. Section 6(2), 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 6 (2)
(f) of the Passport Act. This provision has been considered in
various cases and the ambit of this provision is fairly settled.
7. 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 an 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.
8. 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).
9. 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.
10. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a
direction to respondents 1 to 3 to consider the application of the
petitioner, for renewal of his passport, without raising any
objection relating to the pendency of Crime No.493 of 2021 in 4th
respondent-Kadiam Police Station, Rajahmundry.
11. However, this order shall not preclude the 4th
respondent-Kadiam Police Station from taking such steps as are
necessary to ensure the presence of the petitioner, for conduct
of the investigation of the aforesaid crime for any other
purposes. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, in this Writ
Petition shall stand closed.
___________________________________
JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
Date: 21-09-2022
RJS
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
WRIT PETITION No.22717 of 2022
Date : 21-09-2022
RJS
