High Court · 2025

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 an appropriate Writ' Order or Direction' more particularly one in thenatureofWritofMandamus,declaringtheactionofthe2ndrespondentinnot issuing the passport to petitioner pursuant to the application Vide File number HY2077238730724, daled 28 11t2O24' on the ground the petitioner is involved in oneEDcasevideS.C.No.4T4ol2o24videEC|RNo.l,l/HYZol2O16inthecourt of the Honourabre Metropofitan Sessions judge cum - speciar court under the prevention of Money Laundering act 2OO2 at Nampally as illegal' arbitrary" un constitutional, in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and contrary to the provisions of the passport Act 1967, and consequentry direct the 2nd respondent to issue passport to petitioner pursuant to the application dated 2811112024 without reference to the pending criminal cases' ,q ].A.NO:1 OF 2025 Petition Under rsection 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in s,upport of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the 2nd Respondents to consider the petitioner application Vide number HY2077238730724, dated 2Bl 1112024 for issuance of passport without reference to the pending cases and the letter of the 2nd respondent daled 2o,t1212024. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRt CHUNAP ANVESH KIRAN Counsel for the Respondents : SMT N.V.R.RAJYA LAKSHMt, COUNSEL REPRESENTING SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR The Court made the following ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENTVAS RAO WRIT PETITION No.3EO9 OF 2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: ' ... to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2"d respondent in not issuing the passport to petitioner pursuant to the application Vide File number HY2O7723A73O724, dated 28.11.2024 on the ground the petitioner is involved in one ED case vide S.C.No.474 of 2024 vide ECIR No 1I/HYZO12016 in the court of the Honble Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court under the prevention of Money Lanundering Act 2QO2 at Nampally as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and contrary to the provisions of the PasspLrts Act, 1967, and Consequently direct the 2'd respondent to issue passport to petitioner pursuant to the application dated 28.11.rO24 without reference to the pending criminal cases "

2. Heard Sri C. Anvesh Kiran, learned cbunsel for the petitioner, and Smt. N.V.R. Rajya Lakshmi, learned counsel representing Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, appearing for respondent Nos. I and 2'

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has submitted application on 28'lI'2O24 before respondent No.2 vide Application No'HY207723873O724 requesting for issuance of passport. Pursuant to the said application, respondent No.2 had issued passport and the same is valid up to 27.11.2034. The petitioner su'bmitted application on 24.L2.2024 before respondent No.2 requesting them to re- 2 issue the pa,ssport on the ground that earlier passport issued in favour of th e petitioner was damaged. In spite of repeated requests rnarls [y the petitioner, respondent No.2 hies not taken any steps to consider the application submitted by the petitioner.

4. Per <:ontra, learned counsel for the respondents basing on the inst.rctr ons submitted that the respondent authorities have issued passport on 28.11.2024 under Tatkal Category. Subsequentll., during the course of enquiry,. the respondent authorities cime to know that the petitioner was involved in S.C.No.47zl of 2024 vide ECIR No.11/HyZO 1,2016 and respondent N.o.2 issued letter dated IO.I2.2024 directing the petitioner to submit clarifrcation/explanation. The petitioner, without submitting clarification/explanation, submitted application on 24.12.2024 requesting to re_issue the passport on the alleged ground that earlier passport was damaged. Pursuant to the said application, respondent No.2 has issued notice on 2t2.O7 .2025 directing the petitioner to submit expianation. The petitioner without submitting explanation straight awav approached this court and filed the pr.esent writ J petition and the same is not maintainable under law

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner may be permitted to submit explanation to the letter dated 22.01.2025 issued by respondent No.2 and direct the respondent No.2 to consider the explanation by fixing time limited.

6. The said request was not opposed by learned counsel for the respondents.

7. Having considered the submissions made by the respective counsel and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the petitioner submitted application on 24.12.2024 requesting respondent No.2 to re-issue the passport on the ground that passport No.28057156 was damaged. According to the learned counsel for the respondents, respondent No.2 has already issued notice on

22.OI.2025 directing the petitioner to submit explanation.

8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is directed to submit explanation to the notice dated 22.01.2025 within a period of one week from the , I L date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such explanation, respondent No.2 is directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordarrce with law, withirr a period of two weeks thereafter, after giving opportunity including personal hearing to the petitioner. 9 With tL.e above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order a-s to costs. Miscellzrneous petitions, if a_ny, pending sha_ll stand closed. //TRUE COPYII ASS SD/. A,V.S. PRASAD GISTRAR \ To

1. The principal Sec;r Block Secretariat etary, Union of lndia, Minist Raisina Hill, New ry of Extemal Affairs, South The Regional pa ssport Officer, O/o. The Regional pass ort Officer, 73, Red a Cross Road, Shivaji Nagar, Secu ndera bad, Tela ngana State One CC to SRt CHUNAP ANVESH KIRAN, Advocate IOPUC One CC to SRt G/\DI PRAVEE N KUMAR, Advocate [OpUC] Delhi p 2 2

4. 5. OFFICER Two CD Coptes AS G d C.C. TODAY HIGH COURT DATED:1 110212025 ORDER WP.No.3809 of 2025 t.. I .r: 1 I i[E .zu?i /l .)' ./ DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. \b €