Paruchuri Ashok Babu vs The Union Of India
2022 Latest Caselaw 7443 AP

       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO

                WRIT PETITION No.30373 of 2022

ORDER:-

       The    petitioner   is   the   holder   of   passport    bearing

No.H4355488, issued on 19.06.2009, had sought renewal of the

said   passport    by   way of an      application    bearing   No.22-

1004688859 dated 30.04.2022, before the 3rd respondent-

Passport Officer. As the said application was not being disposed

of, the petitioner made enquiries and came to know that the

renewal of the passport of the petitioner was being kept aside on

the ground of two criminal cases were pending against the

petitioner.

2. The petitioner being aggrieved by the refusal of the

respondents to renewing the passport of the petitioner on the

ground of the pending criminal cases had approached this

Court, by way of the present writ petition.

3. Sri K.M.Krishna Reddy learned counsel, appearing

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 submits

written instructions, given by the Sub-Inspector of Police,

Mangalagiri Rural Police Station. It is stated in the said written

instructions that a criminal case bearing Crime No.651 of 2021

was registered against the petitioner and others under Sections

147, 148, 307, 332, 427, 323, 324 and 342 r/w 149 I.P.C and

Sections 3(1) (r) (s) of SC & ST (POA) Act and the said

investigation in the said crime is continuing. It appears that

subsequently charges under Sections 307 I.P.C and 148 of I.P.C

were dropped in the course of investigation.

5. As far as Criminal Investigation Department is

concerned, Smt.Y.L.Siva Kalpana Reddy, learned standing

counsel for respondent No.5 submits that the investigation

against the petitioner in Crime No.2 of 2022 pending before the

CID Police Station, Mangalagiri is under investigation.

6. The situation as on today is that no Court has taken

cognizance on either of these cases.

7. 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.

8. 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.

9. 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.

10. 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).

11. 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.

12. 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.651 of 2021 in 3rd

respondent-Mangalagiri Rural Police Station and Crime No.2 of

2022 in 5th respondent-CID Police Station, Mangalagiri.

13. However, this order shall not preclude the 4th

respondent-Mangalagiri Rural Police Station and 5th respondent-

CID Police Station, Mangalagiri from taking such steps as are

necessary to ensure the presence of the petitioner, for conduct

of the investigation of the aforesaid crimes 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: 28.09.2022 RJS

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO

WRIT PETITION No.30373 of 2022

Date : 28-09-2022

RJS