Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLRC/380/2026 of Maddu Gurumurty Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 7 April 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 380/2026 Between: MADDU GURUMURTY, S/O. APPALASWAMY, AGED ABOUT
APHC010181072026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 380/2026
Between:
MADDU GURUMURTY, S/O. APPALASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 38
YEARS, OCCUPATIONMERCHANT NAVY SEAMAN, R/O. DOOR NO.2- 124, UMMILADA VILLAGE,SANTHABOMMALI MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM
DISTRICT - 532 430.
...PETITIONER
AND
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OFA.P., AMARAVATI, THROUGH THE
STATION
HOUSE
OFFICER,
WOMEN
POLICE
STATION,SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. SATYA SREENIVASA RAO K
Counsel for the Respondent:
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Court made the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The instant Criminal Revision Case under Sections 438 and 442 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) has been filed by the Petitioner / Accused No.10 seeking to set aside the Order dated 24.11.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.1364 of 2025 in C.C.No.327 of 2025 on the file of the Court of Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Srikakulam and to direct the Passport Authority to renew the passport of the Petitioner for ten (10) years.
2. Heard Sri K.Satya Sreenivasa Rao, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor.
3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Petitioner herein is Accused No.10 and he is the brother of Accused No.1. Learned counsel would further submit that there are no specific allegations against him. It is further submitted that, on the ground of pendency of present case, the application of the Petitioner for renewal of his passport is rejected. Learned counsel would further submit that the Petitioner is employed in Merchant Navy as a Seaman and the Petitioner will be unemployed during the pendency of the trial if passport renewal is restricted to one year. Hence, prayed to direct the Passport Authority for renewal of the passport for a full period of ten years.
4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders.
5. It is not in dispute that the Petitioner is arrayed as Accused No.10 in the present case. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the Petitioner is employed as a Seaman in the Merchant Navy and that non-renewal or restricted renewal of his passport would seriously affect his livelihood. Further, mere pendency of a criminal case, in the absence of any specific restriction imposed by a competent Court, cannot be a ground to deny or curtail the period of renewal of a passport, particularly when such restriction would adversely impact the employment of the Petitioner. In that view, this Court finds it appropriate to allow the present petition.
6. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed setting aside the Order dated 24.11.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.1364 of 2025 in C.C.No.327 of 2025 on the file of the Court of Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Srikakulam. The concerned Passport Authority is directed to renew the passport of the Petitioner for the full statutory period of ten (10) years, subject to the Petitioner complying with all other formalities and requirements as prescribed under law. It is made clear that the Petitioner shall intimate the concerned Court about his travel details and shall cooperate with the trial, as and when required.
Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:08.04.2026 Note: Issue C.C by tomorrow B/o. Dinesh
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Crl.R.C.No.380 of 2026
Dt.08.04.2026
Dinesh