Telangana High Court
WP/1780/2026 of Miriyala Raji Reddy, Vs The Union of India on 21 January 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION NO: '1780 OF 2026 Between: Miriyala Raji Reddy, S/o. Chandra Reddy,
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
WRIT PETITION NO: '1780 OF 2026
Between:
Miriyala Raji Reddy, S/o. Chandra Reddy, Aged about 62 years, Occ:
Business, Rlo. C2-47, Centenary Colony, Ramagiri Mandal, Peddapalli District.
...PETITIONER
AND
The Union of lndia, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, CTV
Division, TV1 Section, Patiala House Annexe, Government of lndia, New Delhi.
The Regional Passport Office, D.No.8-2-215to 219, Kummarguda, Secunderabad, Hyderabad.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAIUUS, declaring the action of Respondent No.2 in not renewing the Passport of the petitioner pursuant to the passport application vide File No.
HY1075700855725 dated 22.O9.O22 on the ground that criminal proceedings are pending against the petitioner, is illegal, unjust, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14,19 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and contrary to the principles laid down by the Honourable Apex Court in several judgments and consequently direct the Respondent No.2 to forthwith renew the passport of the petitioner, by duly considering the petitioner s passport application vide File No. HY 1075700855725
dated 22.09.2022 for a period of I0 years, without reference to the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner in CC.No.166 of 2019 on the file of Honourable Addl. JFCM, Godavarikhani and without reference of Section 5(2)(c)
of the Passports Act, 1967.
lA l{O: 1 OF 2026
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the , ircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Co I t may be pleased to direct the Respondent No.2 to forthwith renew the passpor of the petitioner, by duly considering the petitioner's passport applicati( n vide File No.
HY1075700855725 daled 22.09.2022 for a period of 10 ye:-s, without reference to the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner: rd without reference of Sectron 5(2)(c) of lhe Passports Act, 1967 pending isposal of the Writ Petitio n.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI R. CHANDRASHEKAR REI) )Y
Counsel for the Respondents: SRI N. BHUJANGA RAO, Deputy Solicitor General ot lndia The Court made the following: ORDER
{
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI WSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
WRIT PETITION No.1 78O of 2o26
2L.OL.2026
Between:
Miriyala Raji Reddy
...Petitioner
AND
The Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, CTV Division, TV I Section, Patiala House Annexe, Government of India, Nerv Delhi and another
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:
...Respondents The writ Petition is liled challenging the action of Respondent No.2 in not renewing the petitioner,s passport uid.e File No.HY1075700855725, dated 22.09.2022, on the ground of pendency of criminal case.
2. Heard Sri R.Chandra Shekar Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri N.Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, for respondent Nos.1 and 2. perused the record. I I I
\E \'l \ \B[.] \\P t730 l0l()
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that t tere arraignment of the petitioncr in a crimina-l case cannot be a grr und for denial of passport. He relies on the judgment of this Courr n W.P No.24690 of 2025, dated 03.09.2025
4. Learned Sta:rding Counsel for the respond: rts submits that criminal case is pending against the petitioner r,i le C.C.No.166 of 2019 before the learned Additional JFCM, Gori tvarikhani. It is submitted that the respondent authorities u,o I [d consider the petitioner's application for a period of one year ( I ly, if he obtains permission to trarrel abroad from the court where he crimina-l case is pending against him.
5. Be that as it may, considering the judgrnent )f the coorciinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.2469O of 2025, cr ted 03.09.2025, and the purpose for which the passport is being equested by the petitioner, this Court directs the respondent Nr 2 to renew the passport to the petitioner on the follo"r.ing conditicr s:
i) The petitioner herein shall submit an unC with an affidavit in C.C.No.166 of 2019, pendinl; learned Additional JFCM, Godavarikhani., statintJ not leave India during pendency of the said <,r permission of the Court and that he shall coopr:: Court in concluCing the proceedings in the said crir iil On filing such an undertaking as well ar trial Court shall issue a certified copy of the samr: weeks therefroml
iii) The petitioner herein shall submit z afresh along with certified copy of this order r I )rtaking along on the frle of that he shall ime., without ate with trial te; affidavit, the r,ithin two (2! n application ; well as the
\ DK.J \YP t730 t0l6 aforesaid undertaking before the Passport Olficer / Authority concerned for renewing the passport; iv| 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; vl Respondent No.2 shall consider the Passport Rules, 1967 while considering the application for renewing of the passport to the petitioner;
vi) The competent authority shall specify the permission period of or,'e year for the petitioner to renew the passport for travellitrg 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, il aly, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. AS ST //TRUE COPY// CTION OFFICER e Secretary' Ministry of External Affairs, The Union dia, CTV Division, TV1 Section, Patiala Hou se Annexe, Government of India, New Delhi The Regional Passport office, D.No.B-2-21 5 to 2'19, Kummarguda, Secunde rabad, HYderaba One CC to SRI R. CHANDRASH EKAR REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRI N BHUJANGA RAO, DePutY Solicitor General of lndia [OPUCI Two CD CoPies SD/-C. DEEPIKA ANT REGPB'fl To, 1. Th
2. a
( d BN
HIGH COURT DATED:2110112026
ORDER
WP.No.1780 of 202G DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS : 5 2026 I v2() x t d