High Court · 2025

Judgment

4. 5 The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Prl Secretary, Dept. of Home, Secretariat Buildings. Hyderabad. The St"ation'House Office, Madhapur Police Station, Madhapur, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500 0Bl . The U-nion of lndia, Ministry of External Affairs, Rep. by its Secretary, South Block, New Delhi. The Eiureau of lmmigration, Hyderabad. Rep. by the FRRO, SadarVallabhai Patel Bol Office, Ne-ar CISF Residential complex, Mamidipally village road, Shamhabad.Hyderabad. The Rajiv Gandhi lnternational Airport (RGIA), Hyderabad, Rep by its Nodal Officer. RGIA, Hyderabad. ...RES'ONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ, order, or direction, one more particularly in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in restraining the petitioner from travelling abroad notwithstanding the order dated 04.10.2024 passed by this Hon'ble Court in Crl.P.No.12140 of 2024' whereby more particularly, the Respondent No.2 having issued requisition to the Respondent No.4 to stop the Petitioner from traveling abroad, in the guise of pendency of FlR.No.1271 of 2024 on the file of the Respondent No.2, as being illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of Article 1a, 1 9(1Xg) and 21 of the constitution of lndia, and contrary to the provisions of the Passport Act,1967, and consequently direct the Respondents to allow the Petitioner to travel abroad lA NO: 1 OF 20215 Petition urce iiection '151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filec i' 'iupport of the petition, the High court nral, be pleased to direct the Respc r d r rts to allow the petitioner to travel fro,n th e Rajiv Gandhi lnternational Airplrt -lyderabad, pending the disposal of the abcv:: writ petition lA NO: 2 OF 202!i Petition unl:rr 'lection 15i cpc praying that in the circurrsr:ances stated in the affidavit fited n r' .rpport of the petition, the High court rr ay be pleased to extend the interirr : ier in wp.No. 1396 of 2025 dated 1olct1t2(,2s until further orders Counsel for the Peti ioner: SRl. ARUVA RAGHURAM MAHADEV Counsel for the Re s rcndent Nos. 1&2: Gp FOR HOME Counsel for the Rr:s:rondent Nos. 3to5: SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUITAR, DY. SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the ollowing: ORDER HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.1396 of2025 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Govemment Pleader for Home appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 & 2 and leamed Deputy Solicitor General appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.3 and 4, and perused the record' With the consent of leamed counsel appearing for the parlies, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal.

2. The case of the petitioner in brief is that the 2nd respondent had issued requisition to the 4th respondent to stop the petitioner from traveling abroad under the guise of pendency of F.I.R.No.127112024 on the file of the 2nd respondent, which action of the 2nd respondent, it is contended as illegat, arbitrary and in violation of Article 14, 19(1)(9) and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of the Passporl Act, 1967 , with a consequential direction to respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to travel abroad. 3 . Petitioner contends that he is the Managing Director of an Infrastructure Company and also other Companies and in the course of his business activities, he is required to travel frequently to various // // . I I l I j l I I I l 2 countries: r (l that on account of case being I.egistered vide Cr.No,I 27 I \.a.t24 on the file of the 2nd respondent. tlre 2, had issuec , requisition to the 41h respondent u01 t,l allow the petitiorer tr-r 1 3\'el abroad, pursuant to which the 4t' res,pondent has issued LoIi rut Circular (LOC), on account of which, the petitioner is not being z rtwed to travel abroad. respondent d 4' Petiti'r r. hulher contends that this couft initiailv by order dated 10-01-2()l i l- r,1 suspended the LOC issued against thc lrelitioner for a period oItr':: ivceks.

5. Pelitir,rr,: lufther contends that lhis Courl lhereiLftr:r by order dated 04-C2-'. (,25, permitted the petitioner to travel lrbrcad as and when re<1u r':r by complying with the conditions ol.th s tlor-rrt in its orderdated ( .' ;l -2025.

6. Petition.:r hus, contends that the respondent autltcrities may be directed to irl 'r'the directions issued by this courl darecr 0-01-2025 till F.I.R.No. l. '1r2oz4 on the file of 2nd respondenr attains finality.

7. Leanrel ( irr.emment pleader for Home appearing or behalf of respondert'ro I and 2 submits that though, this Court bi.r,rder dated 10-01-2025 lra l initiary suspended the Loc for a per.iorr of three t, i t, l 3 weeks, by further order dated 04-02-2025, the interim order granted earlier was extended until further orders subject to the petitioner complying with the conditions imposed in the order dated 10-01-2025'

8. Leamed Govemment Pleader for Home thus, submits that if this Court were to direct the petitioner to comply with the aforesaid conditions till disposal of FIR No.127112024, the authorities would abide by the same. g. I have taken note ofrespective contentions urged.

10. Having regard to the submissions made as above, and taking note of the fact that this Court by order dated 1O-Ol-2025 had permitted the petitioner to travel abroad subject to petitioner submitting his travel itinerary and flight tickets of onward and return joumey before the ( (. leamed X Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, Kukatpally and also giving an undertaking that he shall cooperate with the \ \ investigation and appear before the Police as and when required, and the said order having been extended until further orders with the same conditions imposed, this court is of the view that the petitioner should be directed to adhere to the aforesaid conditions till filing of charge 4 t sheet ir F. ,l \1o.1271/2024 and thereafter till the clisposrrl olC.C. by theMa.qishai, I 1. It s e ll rnade clear that in the event of pet tion,:r failing to compll' u i l- the conditions imposed by this ('our- i. ordcr dated l0-01-2025. re respondent authorities are at libeftr. :o take fuilher action in ao:r lCance with law.

12. Subje: :, above observation and directio,. this \,v.rit pcrition is disposed oi \o costs

13. ConseqLr rtl1,., miscellaneous petitions, if an1, pend ng shall stand closed. //TRUE COPYII /:\, \ SD/,,T. JAYASREE PEPI,,TY REGISTRAR SECT'ION OFFICER :rl Secretary, Dept. of Horfrd, Secre tariat Buildings. .:;e Office, Madhapur Police Station, I\,4aChap.rr, Hyderabad, :)81 ., rion of lndia, Ministry of External Affairs ljorrth Block, New ,"rmigratign, Hyderabad. Rep. by the FRRCT, t:iadarVallabhai Near UtSt- Residential complex, Irrlamidip,ally village road, llrabad. - i.lnternational Airport (RGIA), Hyderabad, Rerp by its Nodal yrlerabad. r/etropolitan lrlagistrate, Cyberabad, Kukatr,at v. I.RUVA RAGHURAM MAHhDEV Advocate, I.o6I ]CI I3ADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DY. SoLICITO{;;Er,rLner- or I' FOR HOIVIE ,High Court for the Statr: of Telangana at I L To, Delhi.

1. The Prirrr;iJ T.S.,Hyderabilc 2. The Station l-Jc Telangana - 50r 3. The Secretan, 4. The Bureau c'l' Patel Bol Olfic;r Shamhabad. Flv 5. The Rajiv G;lrii Officer. RG ll. F 6. The X Additioira 7. One CC to Sitll 8. One CC to SiFtt rNDtA [OPUC' . 9. Two CCs to ( Hyderabad IC,l- 10.Two CD Cop es BM LS HIGH COUFt." DATED:1 1l(ta,t2025 i ; I I I I I i I I ORDER WP.No.1396 of 2025 =:=.. Ht: S1-..i, 1 -:\ ). ( 7 ill\ t'1 ? /i,Ytr: ( ,a a', i ;:/ t a) fsly,r,:. -- r1 / DISPOSING CIF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT CO STS p6