WP/3672/2026 of Mamidi Renuka Vs The State of Telangana on 9 March 2026

ORDER:

A case in FIR No.846 of 2017, for the offences punishable under Sections 406,420 rlw 34IPC, and Section -5 of AP Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999 (APPDFEA), and Sections 4 and 5 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schernes (Banning) Act, 1978 (PC & MCSBA), is registered against the petitioner. [t is her case that she submitted an application before the 2''d respondent-passport authority on 04.04.2019 for renewal of her passport, however, the passport authority refused to renew her passport on the ground that criminal proceedings are pending against her.

2. Heard Mr. M. Phanindra Bhargav, [earned counsel for the petitioner; Mrs. N.V.R. Rajya Lakshmi, learned Standing Counsel representing Mr.N.Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General; and leamed Government Pleader for Home. Perused the record HT

wp_3672_2026 NBK, J 3' Leanred counsel for the petitioner contends that it is settled law that mere pendency ofcriminal proceedings cannot be a ground to refuse to issue / renew the passport. 4' Learred Standine Counsel would contend that the investigation is completed in FIR No.846 of 201 7 andcharge sheet has been filed before the Metropolita, Sessio,s Judge, at Nampally, Hyderabad, and the sarne was taken on filt: was C-C. No. l8 of 2020. It is contended that the rnatter is covered by the orderc passed by this court in w.p.No.32ll of 2026, dated 04.02.2026.

5. Leame:d Government preader for ljome arso submits that the investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed before the Metropolitan Sessions Juclge, at Nampally, Hyderabad. 6' Having, considered the respective contentions, it is relevant to note that the Hon'ble Division Bench of this court, in w.A.N o.r94 of 2026, dated 17 -02-2026, by referring to secrion 6(2x0 of the passports Act, 1967, and GSR 57c, (E) dated 25.09. lgg3, and the office Memorandum dated 10.10.2019, a,d also the precedent-iudgments in Mahesh Kumar Agarwal v- union of Indiar, ancr Nidhi Aganvar v. union of India2, hetd as fbilows:

13. rn ,re right of the principre raid down by the Apex Gourt concerning the interpretation of GSR sz0(E) dated 2s.08.1993 and office Memorandum dated 10.10.20ig, we are of the considered view that the appeflant shourd make an apprication for seeking Noc from the concerned triar courts where criminar cases are pending against him. rt is upon issuance of Noc that the appeilant shourd file an ap'placation for renewal of the passport. tn case the courts prescribe a period for which the passport is to be issued, the 1 2025 SCC Online sc 2887 2 2025 SCC Online TS 1778

wp_3672_2026 NBK, J passport authority should honour that period. Othennrise, 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. It is for the appellant to seek renewal of passport based upon such NOC before the Regional Passport Authority. Needless to say, the Regional Passport Authority would consider the request of extension in accordance with law i.e., the Passports Act, 1967, GSR 570(E) dated 25.08.{993 and Office Memorandum dated 10.10.2019 applicable to the case on hand.

7. Admittedly, crirninal proceedings in C.C. No. l8 of 2020 on the file of Metropolitan Sessions Judge, at Nampally, Hyderabad, are pending against the petitioner. Therefore, in light of the orders dated 17.02.2026 passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.No.194 of 2026, the petitioner is required to approach the trial Court and file appropriate application seeking No Objection Certificate (NOC) for renewal of passport. Upon filing such application, the trial Court shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders. Thereafter, upon the petitioner fumishing the NOC, the passport authority shall consider the same for renewal of passport of the petitioner, in accordance with [aw.

8. It is made clear that the NOC for issuance / renewal of passport shall not be construed as a perrnission to travel abroad. If the petitioner intends to travel abroad, she is required to make a separate application before the trial !, t i ti\ !

t I wp-3672_2025 NBK, J Court stating the purpose and duration of travel, and the trial Court shall consider the sarne on its own merits b-v imposing appropriate conditions, as deemed ne,-1essary, if perrnission is being granted. Needless to state that the trial Court shall proceed in accordance with law to secure the presence of the petitioner fbr the purpose of trial in the pending crirninal proceedings, if any of the r:onditions so irnposed while granting abroad travel permission is violated.

9. Accordingly. the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pt:nding, if an5,, shall stand closed. a Sd/.P.PONNA KRISHNA REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// OFFICER To,

1. The State of Telangana, Thru SHO P.S. Saroor Nagar, Hyderabad.

2. The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Hyderabad, Telangana.

3. On,e CC to SRl. M PHANINDRA BHARGAV, Advocate IOPUCI

4. Tw,r CCs to GP FOR HOME ,High Court for the State of Telangana At Hyderabad. [OUT]

5. One CC to SRI N. BHUJANGA RAO Deputy Solicitor General of lndia [OPUC]

6. Trrvo CD Copies DAN PMK 9?

HIGH'COURT DATEII:09/03/2A26 WP.Ncr.3672 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS CC TODAY bt E t CI() R 12 i{Afi 2026 4}i': k I *