Telangana High Court
WP/2425/2026 of Venkata Narasimha Rao Pattela Vs The Union of India on 23 March 2026
THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA 7m Between: Venkata Narasimha Rao Pattela, S/o Paftela Krishna Moorthy' H'NO' 8-2-
[ 33001
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
(SPecial Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
7m
Between:
Venkata Narasimha Rao Pattela, S/o Paftela Krishna Moorthy' H'NO' 8-2- i1ei2tit{a and 11/305, Mountain View Apartment, Road No. 3 Banjara Hills, Hyderabad- 500034, Telangana
...PETITIONER
D
1. The Union of lndia, Ministry of Extemal Affairs' Represented by its Principal Secretary, South Block, New Delhi-1 10 001 '
2. The Regional Passport Officer, Hyderabad, ffice located at D' No' 8-2-215 to
- zi'S, X;.arguda, Secunderabad, Telangana - 500003'
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 ot lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction' more in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUStheRespondentsininsistingthepetitionertoobtainordersfromcourt forcontinuationofpassportissuedtothemvidepassportapplicationno.AK004T6I
dated0g.12.2025,despitesubmittingthereplytotheshowcausenoticevideRef'
No. SCN/ 10530865483/25, dated 29'12'2025 issued by the respondents and therebyshowingthestatusoftheapplicationofthepetitionerasUnderreview despite of renewing passport and as being illegal' arbitrary and contrary to the provisionsofPassportAct,lg6TandPassportRules'lgS0andalsoinviolationof Articles14,lgand2loftheconstitutionoflndiaandconsequentlytodirectthe Respondents not to insist the petitioner for retuming of the passport'
LA. NO: 2OF 202!.6
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 dismiss the above Writ Petiti,rn by vacating the interim order dated 0310912024 passed in l.A.
No.1 of 2024 in \f/.P. No. 24267 of 2024 and to pass such other order or orders.
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2026
Petition und,ar Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in s;upport of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct 2nd respondent to nc( take any coercive steps.
Counsel for the Petitioner : M/S.PILLIX LAW FIRM
counselrortheRespondentNo'1&2:.t:i,:*""T811}r?l*tf;,"
The Court made the following: ORDER
-_'-----'-.---j.7
--7
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTTCE NAGESH BIIEEMAPAKA
WRIT PETITION No.2425 of 2026
2s.03.2026
Between:
Venkata Narasimha Rao Pattela
...Petitioner
AND
The Union of India,
Ministry of Extemal Affairs,
Represented by its principal Secretary,
South Block, New Delhi and another.
...Respondents
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 petitioner submitted an Application No.AK00476l, dated 09.12.2025 to the respondent-Passport Authority seeking renewal of his passport, and the Passport Authority renewed the same on post-Police Verification basis. Subsequently, respondent No.2, vide letter dated 29.12.2025, sought clarification from the petitioner stating that an adverse report has been submitted by the police wherein it is stated that criminal proceedings are pending against the petitioner in FIR No.47 of 2022 of CCS, Hyderabad Police Station, and that the case is presently pending trial in C.C.No.6786 of 2022 on the file of the learned XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad. In
NBK,J wP]425 2026 response to the: said letter dated 29.12.2025, the petitioner approached the Passport Authority and surrendered the passport.
2. Heard It4/s.Pillix Law Firm, learned counsel for petitioner and Smt. NVR.Rajya Lakshmi, learned Standing Counsel for Central Government representing iiri N.Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, for resp,ondent Nos.l and 2. Perused the record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed a quash petition in Crl.P.No.3239 of 2025 before this Court seeking to quash the C.C.No.6786 of 2022 before the trial Court. [t is stated that this Court,vide interim order dated 05.03.2025, granted stay of all further proceedings, insofar as the petitioner is concerned, till 16.04.2A25. He funher subnrits that as the stay order granted by this Court is subsisting as on date, the petitioner is unable to approach the concerned Magistrate for renewal of his passport. It is also contended that mere pendency of a criminal case cannot be a ground for directing surrender of the passport.
4. Learrred Standing Counsel relies on the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.l94 of 2026, dated 17.02.2026. Further, by referring to Offrce Memorandum dated 10.10.2019 issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, he submits that in view of the pending criminal proceedings against the petitioner, the petitioner is required to produce N(f,C / permission from the concerned trial Court, however, as there is no NOC furnished by the petitioner, the passport of the petitioner has been impounded and therefore the action of respondent authorities cannot be said to be illegal or arbitrary. ,/ \ ,\ i
J NBKJ wP 2425 2026
5. Having considered the respective contentions and perused the record, it may be noted that mere arraignment of the petitioner as accused in criminal proceedings cannot be a ground to refuse issuance / renewal of passport. However, as per the Orders passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 194 of 2026, dated 17.02.2026, the petitioner is required to approach the concerned trial Court and make an application seeking NOC for obtaining the passport. The observation of the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A. No. 194 of 2026, is as follows: "13. ln the light of the principle laid down by the Apex Gourt concerning the interpretation of GSR 570(E) dated 25.08.1993 and Office Memorandum dated 10.10.2019, we are of the considered view that the appellant should make an application for seeking NOG from the concerned trial courts where criminal cases are pending against him. lt is upon issuance of NOG that the appellant should file an application for renewal of the passport. ln case the courts prescribe a period for which the passport is to be issued, the passport authority should honour that period. Otherwise, if it does not stipulate any period, the notification provides default rules, including issuance for a shorter period, ordinarily one year, in appropriate cases.
14. Since the passport of the appellant is going to expire on 28.02.2026, the appellant is at liberty to make an application for issuance of NOC from the concerned courts within this week. lf such an application is made before the learned courts, the learned courts would endeavour to take it up expeditiously, preferably within a week, and pass appropriate orders after hearing the parties. !t is for the appellant to seek renewal of passport based upon such NOC before the Regional \ \
NBI(,J wP 2425 2026 P;rsspon Authority. Needless to say, the Regional Piassport Authority would consider the request of e:(tension in accordance with law i.e., the Passports Act, 1967, GSR 570(E) dated 25.08.1993 and Office lUlemorandum dated 10.10.2019 applicable to the case on hand."
6. tn the instant case, as against the proceedings in C.C. No. 6786 of 2022, the potitioner filed a criminal petition before this Court, wherein this Court granted stay of all firrther proceedings in the said C.C. No. 6786 of 202.2.
6.1. As pr31 ft16 Passports Act, 1967, GSR 570(E) dated 25.08.1993, and Office Memorandum dated 10.10.2019, a passport applicant facing criminal proceedings has to obtain NOC from the concemed Court, and if the applicant is facing proceedings in more than one Court, then he/she has to obtain NOC from all those Courts.
6.2. As lhe proceedings in C.C. No. 6786 of 2022 have been stayed by this Court vide an interim order dated 05.03.2025 in Criminal Petition No.3239 'tf 2025, this Court falls within the definition of "concemed Court" for the purpose of issuance of NOC to the petitioner.
7. [n that view of the matter, this Court is inclined to direct the respondent-passport authority to consider the application of the petitioner for rene,*'al of his passport for a period of one year, in accordance with law. It is however made clear that the direction now issued for renewal of passport shall not be construed as permission to the petitioner to travel abroad. Ifthe petitioner intends to travel abroad, he shall file a separate \r ,/
NBKJ wP]42s 2026 application before this Court if the criminal petition is still pending before this Court by such time (ot before the trial Court if the proceedings in c.c. No. 6786 of 2022 resume by such time), stating the purpose and duration of travel; and that apptication would be dealt on its own merits by imposing appropriate conditions as necessary if abroad travel permission is being granted. Needless to mention that appropriate steps shall be taken to secure the presence of the petitioner for the purpose of trial in c.c. No. 6786 of 2022, if the conditions imposed while granting abroad travel permission are violated'
8. Accordingly,thewritpetitionisdisposedof.Nocosts. Misceltaneous petitions pending, if any' shall stand closed' SD/- K.BHAVANI SWAMY REGISTRAR ,/TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,
1.
2.
4.
5. Two CD CoPies' BSK TKS $. ; Ii I I t I I
HIGH COT'RT DATED: 23t09t2026 WP.No.242S of 2026 A- ATE 11 \1\ + DEc"i 1\1\ C) _r + t=l.l a -aa DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS c ,P6& ' Y(,v a9\ t