SUKHAVASI SATHEESH v. THE UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS

03.01.2025 on the ground of registration of criminal case against the petitioner vide FIR No. 142 of 2024 of Repalle Police Station, Bapatia District as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of Passport Act 1967, judgments of the Honourable Supreme Court and this Honourable High Court and consequently direct the respondents to renew and issue the passport to the petitioner and and to pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 may be pleased to direct the respondents to renew and issue the passport as per application No. No.VJ2077271779325, dated 03.01.2025, pending disposal of the Writ Petition pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass such Counsel for the Petitioner:

#1. SIVA RAMA KRISHNA KOLLURU Counsel for the Respondent(S):

#1. GP FOR HOME

#2. DIVYA DATLA(CENTRAL GOVERNMENT COUNSEL) The Court made the following: :: ORDER :: The above writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondent No.3 in not renewing / re-issuing the passport, in pursuance of the application made by the petitioner vide File No.VJ2077271779325, dated 03.01.2025, due to the pendency of a criminal case in Cr.No.142 of 2024 of Repalle PS, Bapatla District, as illegal and arbitrary.

#2. Heard Sri K. Siva Rama Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Divya Datla, learned Standing Counsel, appeared for respondents 1 to 3 SRS,J W.P.No.1633 of 2025 and Sri Ajay, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appeared for respondent No.4.

#3. The petitioner applied for a passport and the authorities issued a passport vide No.N0251567 on 22.06.2015, valid up to 21.06.2025. The petitioner applied for renewal of the passport by making an application vide File No.VJ2077271779325, dated 03.01.2025. Respondent No.3 issued a shortfall notice dated 07.01.2025 (Ex.P2), due to an adverse police verification report. In para No.5 of the affidavit, it was pleaded that the petitioner appeared before respondent No.3, in turn, the respondent No.3 informed orally about the stage of the crime.

#4. Sri Ajay, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would submit that a case in Cr.No.142 of 2024, for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 379, 506 r/w 34 of IPC, was registered against the petitioner by Repalle PS, Bapatla District, on 17.08.2024, wherein the petitioner was shown as accused No.1. The investigation is pending. Notice under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C was served on the petitioner.

#5. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India1, observed that the right to travel abroad is a part of personal liberty and the right to possess a passport etc., can only be curtailed following law and not on the subjective satisfaction of anyone.

#6. The Division Bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court in its decision reported in Satish Chandra Verma v. Union of India (UOI) and others2, observed as under: "The right to travel abroad is an important basic human right for it nourishes independent and self-determining creative character of the individual, not only by extending his freedoms of action, but also by