WP/23021/2026 of KARRI KRISHNA REDDY Vs THE UNION OF INDIA on 24 September 2026

1. KARRI KRISHNA RE Hariviliu apartment, H.No Hospital, Bhimavaram 2,

1. THE UNION OF INDIA South Block, New Delhi -

2. The Regional Passpor Beside Rythu Bazar, Ma 530009. Petition under Articl circumstances stated in pleased to issue a Writ o direction, declaring the a petitioner's application fo Reference No.26-105936 passport solely on the g the file of the Court of E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE 25th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT ABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMAL T PETITION NO: 23021 OF 2026 DDY, S/o.Brahma Reddy, Male, age

o. 27-8-23/2, flat no.113, Sri ram Pura Bhimavaram, West Godavari District AND A, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of -110011. rt Office, Rep. by its Regional Passpor arripalem Vuda Layout, NAD Post, V le 226 of the Constitution of India pra the affidavit filed therewith, the High of Mandamus or any other appropria ction of the Regional Passport Office r renewal of Passport No. AJ426697 63902 in abeyance and refusing to ground of the pendency of Crime No. f the II Additional Judicial Magistrate DESH

LAPATI ed 48 yrs, R/o. am, Near pallavi -534201. ...Petitioner External Affairs, rt Officer (RPO), Visakhapatnam - ...Respondents aying that in the h Court may be ate writ, order or er in keeping the and Application renew the said 193 of 2019 on e of First Class- cum-ll Additional Civil Judge, Bhimavaram, as illegal, arbitrary unreasonable, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and contrary to the provisions of the Passports Act, 1967 IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to renew and reissue the petitioner's passport or reconsider his application afresh, considering the pending criminal proceedings, his bona fide export business travel, and his undertaking to comply with the competent Court's directio IA NO: 2 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to implead the Station House Officer, II-Town Police Station, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District, as the 3rd respondent in W.P. No. 23021 of 2026 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: SRINIVAS MANCHANAPALLI Counsel for the Respondents: W V B SHRAVAN CENTRAL GOVT.COUNSEL

The Court made the following order:

Assailing the action of respondent No.2 in keeping the petitioner’s Passport Application for renewal in abeyance and refusing to renew the said passport solely on the ground of pendency of Crime No.193 of 2019 on the file of the Court of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class-cum-II Additional Civil Judge, Bhimavaram, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

2. Heard Sri D.Eshwar Sai Teja, learned counsel, representing Sri Srinivas Manchanapalli, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri W.V.B.Shravan, learned Central Government Counsel appearing for the respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, submitted that the petitioner’s passport was valid up to 17.11.2026 and that he had applied for renewal of his passport on 20.05.2026, in accordance with the provisions of the Passport Act. However, the same was kept abeyance solely on the ground of pendency of Crime No.193 of 2019 on the file of the Court of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class-cum-II Additional Civil Judge, Bhimavaram without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. Hence, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner.

4. On the other hand, learned Central Government Counsel, on instructions of the Officer on Special Duty, Regional Passport Office, dated 25.08.2026, submitted that the petitioner had previously been issued a short validity passport upon production of the requisite permission from the competent Court. In compliance with the orders of the competent Court, passport was issued for a period of one year valid from 13.11.2025 to 12.11.2026. He further submitted that the Passport Office addressed a letter dated 12.06.2026 to the Superintendent of Police, West Godavari, seeking clarification regarding the present status of the case. The Superintendent of Police, in his report dated 16.07.2026, stated that the charge sheet had been filed on 03.05.2023 vide S.R. No. 408 of 2023 on the file of the Court of the II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Bhimavaram, and that the C.C. number was awaited.

5. Perused the material available on record and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

5. Section 6(2) of the Passport Act, 1967 is germane and the same is extracted hereunder: Section 6(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 in 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.

6. Section 6(2) (f) relates to a situation where the applicant is facing trail in a criminal court. Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act, 1967, has been considered on several occasions by the Hon’ble Apex Court and High Courts. The Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as various High Courts 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 depend on no objection being given by the concerned court.

7. In Vagala Venkata Siva Kumar Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, this Court has categorically held that, as per Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act, 1967, the passport authority shall refuse to issue passport or travel document for visiting any foreign country, if criminal proceedings are pending against the applicant in India.

8. In view of the observations held above, unless charge sheet is filed and the same is taken cognizance of by the concerned committal Court, mere registration of a crime would not amount to pendency of criminal proceedings, which empowers the passport authorities to withhold issuance or renewal of passport. In the instant case, the submissions made by both the learned counsel would indicate that the charge sheet has been filed, but cognizance has not yet been taken. Thus, Section 6(2)(f) would not attract to the facts of the case.

9. In view of the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the authorities to issue the passport to the petitioner, if it meets all the necessary requirements, other than the objection regarding pendency of crime. There shall be no order as to costs. As sequel thereto, miscellaneous petition, if any, pending shall stand closed. Interim orders, if any, shall stand vacated.

____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 25.09.2026 MP

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

WRIT PETITION No.23021 of 2026 25.09.2026

MP