Telangana High Court

WP/675/2026 of Gollapally Rajendra Prasad Vs Union of India on 10 February 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No : 675 OF 2026 Between: AND 1 Gollapally Rajendra Prasad, S/o.

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

[ 33001 ...PETITIONER HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No: 675 OF 2026 Between: AND

Gollapally Rajendra Prasad, S/o. Sambaiah, Aged about 41 Years, Occ. Busiriess, R/o. H No. 5-1 'l-330, Pochammakunta Naimnagar, Hanumakonda, Hanumakonda District.

Union of lndia, Rep by Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, PSP Division, New Delhi. Regional Passport Officer, Hyderabad D No. 8-2-215 to 219, Kummarguda, Secunderabad, 500003, Telangana State. P. Malla Reddy, S/o. Venkat Reddy, Aged about 53 Years, Occ. Controller of Examination Kakatiya University, Warangal Fl/o. H No. 2-6-1405, Bhavani Nagar, Hanumakonda, Hanumakonda District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the proceedings No. HY8076001595825, dated 22.12.2025 of the 2nd respondent in rejecting the renewal of pass port to the petitioner is illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of lndian Pass Port Act, violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of lndia set-aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to issue renewal of pass port to the petitioner.

o lA 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 2rrd respondent to issue renewal of pass port to the petitioner by suspending the proceedings No. Hy807600'ls9s82s, dated 22.12.202s, forthwith pending disposal of the main writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt R.DAyAKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.i & 2: SMT N.V.R.RAJYA LAKSHMI, SC FOR CENTRAL GOVT. REP. SRI N.BHUJANGA RAO, Dy. SOL|CITOR GENERAL OF tNDtA Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI T.VENKAT REDDY, SC FOR KU The Court made the following: ORDER

n IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA TVRIT No.675 of 2026 1o.02.2026 Between: Gollapally Rajendra Prasad ...Petitioner AND Union of lndia, Represented by its Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, PSP Division, New Delhi and 2 others ...Respondents AEPER: The Writ Petition is filed challenging the action of Respondent No.2 in rejecting the renewal of petitioner's passport uid"e File No.HY8O76001595825, dated 2'2.t2.2025, on thc ground of pendency of criminal case.

2. Heard Sri R.Dayakar Rao, learned counsel for petitioner, smt N.v.R.Rajya Lakshmi, learned standing counsel for central Government, representing Sri N.Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, for respondent Nos.l and 2 and sri

NBK,J wP_675 2026 T.Venkat Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Kakatiya University, for respc,ndent No.3. Perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that mere arraignment of the petitioner in a criminal case cannot be a ground for denial of passport. He relies on the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.2469O of 2025, dated O3.O9 .2025.

4. Lezrrned Standing Counsel for the respondents submits that criminal case is pending against the petitione r uid.e C.C.No.1B59 of 2024 before the learned Junior Civil Judge Court at Hanumakonda and therefore, refusal to renew the passport as per Rules cannot be said to be illegal.

5. Be that as it may, considering the judgment of the coordinate Bench ol' this Court in W.P.No.24690 of 2025, dated 03.09.2025, and the purpose fclr which the passport is being requested by the petiticlne:, this Court directs thc respondent No.2 to renew the passport to the petitioner on the follou'ing conditions:

i) The petitioner herein shall submit an undertaking along with an affidavit in C.C.No.1859 of 2024, pending on the file of learned Junior Civil Judge Court at Hanumakonda., stating that he sh,all not leave India during pendency of the said C.C., without permission of the Court and that he shall cooperate with trial Court in concluding the proceedings in the said C.C;

ii) On filing such an undertaking as well as affidavit, the trial Court shall issue a certified copy of the same within two (2) weeks therefrom; S\ .-.. /

NBK..I wP_(r75 _1026 iiil The Petitioner herein shall submit an application afresh along with certified copy of this order as well as the aforesaid undertaking before the Passport Officer / Authority concerned for renewing the passport; ivl On filing such an application, the Passport Officer/ Authority shall consider the same afresh in the light of the observations made by this Court herein as well as the contents of the undertaking given by the petitioner for renewing the passport, in accordance with law, within three (O3) weeks from the date of said application;

v) Respondent No.2 shall consider the Passport Rules, L967 while considering the apptication for renewing of the passport to the petitioner; vil The competent authority shall specify the permission period of one year for the petitioner to renew the passport for travelling abroad, and also obtain appropriate undertaking from the petitioner stating that the petitioner shall not overstay the permitted period and shall surrender the passport upon return to India.

vii) Any other condition as deemed appropriate by the trial Court.

6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions. it any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. SD/. A.SRINIVASA REDDY STANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER l i I I I i

To,

The Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, lndia. , New Delhi, Union of BSR PSK

2. Irc -l"gional^ Passport offic-er, ^Hyderabad D No. a-2-21s to 21g, Kummarguda, Secunderabad, 500003, Telangana State.

3. The Junior Civil Judge Court at Hanumakonda.

4. One CC to SRI R.DAYAKAR RAO, Advocate tOpUCI

5. One CC to SRI T.VENI(AT REDDY, SC FOR KU IOPUC]

6. one cc to sRl N.BHUJANGA RAo, DEpury soltctroR GENERAL oF lNDlA, High court for the state of retangana at HydLEbao tcjpuEl'-'

7. Two CD Copies w

ft s HIGH COURT DATEDi 1010212026

ORDER

WP.No.675 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITI WITHOUTCOSTS STATE r g rtB ltrffi o (-) N, .F ir \ 0 % o !

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead