Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu vs Central Bureau of Investigationr iL is submittcd Lhat thc passport

Petition under Article 226 oI 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 action of the Regional Passport Officer (Respondent No 3) in seizing the Petitioner's Passport No K8263594 without renewal of the passport vide refere nce no 22-2003237 328 as illegal' invalid and arbitrary against the Article 14 and 21 of Constitution of lndia and principles of natural justice and consequently direct the Respondent No 3 to renew * * v , , i ,f i t € the passport of the Petitioner immediately and release the same in favour of the Petitioner. NO:1 OF 2025 IA petition under section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be please to direct the Respondent No.3 to renew the Petitioner's Passport No. K9263594 vide reference no.22-2003237 328, thereby release the same in favour of the petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner: M/S S. VIJAYA PRASHANTH Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 3: Smt. N.V.R. RAJYALAKSHMI, REPRESENTING SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR Dy. SOLICIToR GEN. oF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2,4 and 5: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER i p 4 p I s, F* * * i ts, * THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N'V' SHRAVAN KUMAR W.P. No.3783 of 2o25 ORDER: This writ petition is tlled secking a writ of mandamus declaring respondenl No.3, Commissioner-cum-Regional seizing the petitioner's Passport No K8263594 passport vide reference No'22-20O3237328 the action oi the Passport Officer, in withoul renewal ol Lhc as illegal and arbitrary' It is submitted that the petitioner is represen[ed by his mother

2. by SPecial Por't'cr of AttorncY' Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that based on a 3. complaint locigcd by thc wife oi the petitioner namely Bandi Sravani Reddy, the Women Police Station Saroornagar' Ranga Reddy District' registered a case vide Crime No'275 of 2O 18 for the offence under Sections 498-A, 323,4()6' 506 IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of DP Act against thc petilioner as Accused No' 1 along with all other family members and took up 1-he invcstigation and the charge sheet was filed vide C.C. No.2942of 2o19 on the flle of the V Additional Metropolitan Judge, Ranga ReddY District at Magistrate-cum'Junior Civil Initially, the marriage was registered L.B. Nagar, for the said oifence between the Petittoner and his wile held on 12.O8.2O 16, afterwards, withtheconsentofbothfamilymembers,performedtheirmarrrageon 14.03.2018 as per l{indu Rites and Customs and after ten days of their marriage , both husband and wife ' went to tlSA on 25 'O3 '2OlB ' I I \ u *.". **il:,"..o," Thereafter, petitioner,s wife filed a ci lor clivorcc elgainst the petitioner vicle case No.DR 1g00I 1g a , of common pleas, Sion Domestic Reradon in UsA urro "or., the same was grante.r on og.o7.2o19. That she herself shows that to rive with rhe petitioner ancr rired a rarse .o_o,.,,.,, ll"_-:::l,,,"- not only petitioner but also agai.st his fam,y members o, rting that the petitioner u,as absconding and requested the iII Addition - -"*" rvrdBrstrate- cUm-JUnior Civil . tr,.l_^ (earlier v Additione issue Non-Bairable warrant and the the wile of the petit. preas on oT 0s.20ts,contracred Judge' Ranga Redd"::::::t::::T: Ll Mekoporitan Magistrq civ, Judge) is pending Moreover, roncr after taking d ivorc, ".*,"-.r--rrnior r- r' l\agar' ",..ltu'n", second _";,":i::,.:ourt of common with another person son. But the respondent the petitioner and their namery Avinash prakash and blessed with a No.2 is not withdrawing the case against family members subjecting the petitioner to harassmen[. 4. it is further submitted that the petitioner came to knor.l, that after filing of the charge sheet the trial Court issued NBW against the petitioner' As such, the petitioner is unable to visit f{ydcrabad to see his mother. The pedtioner,s apprehension i -., arrest rhe peritioner at Airport itself and u.o, n*'llt,tl" .oo,,." tm in Judicial Custody and thereby seizing the passport of the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner and his brothcr alread.y filed euash Petition vide Criminal petition No.746 of 2O2S bcfore this Court seeking to quash the CC proceedings and the same rs pending. J III,P. No-37a3 ol2025 It is further submitted that the petitioner went to Indian 5. Embassy lor ttrc purpose of renewal of his passport but the Passport was seized by the respondent No'3 due to pendency of the above said criminal case. The aclion of the respondent No'3 in seizing of the Passport of the pctitloner is illegal and arLritrary hence' the petitioner Frled the Present writ Petttlon 6. On the other hand, the learned counsel Mrs' N V R' Rajyalakshmr, representing the learned Depulv Solicitor General of India Sri Gadi l)raveen Kumar for the respondents' has placed a copy ofthewritteninstructionssubmittedbytheAssistantPassportofflcer (Legal Section) based on which it is submitted that a Passport No.K-8263594 dated 15 03 2013 valid ti11 14 03 '2023 was issued to the petitioner. Thc oifice of the Regional Passport had received complaints from the wife of the petitioner and his father-in-law regarding filing of cases against him by enclosing copies of orders of Additional Junior Civil V Additionat Metropolitan Magistrate cum Judge , Cybcrerbad at L IS Nagar directing for impounding of passport issued to the petitioner' Thereafter' the petitioner was asked to submit his cxplanalion regarding the allegation and criminal case hled against him Lrow'ever, no rcsponse was received from him Hence' the Passport of thc petitir)ner was impounded on 14' 10'2019 after duly following ttre procedure laid down (File No.Hyd/ 30/ PoLlPcc I 27812O)g). 'Ihc respondent No 3 received an e-mail on 06 lO 2022 lrom CGI, Nclr' York stating that the petitione r has applied for reissue -V 4 NVSI(_ J w.P. No.37a3 or2O2s fJ' of Passport and seeking clearance/ objections vide File No.US2O7 4278796522 for which factual posirion rvas inforlned to the CGI, New york vide email dated 1g.IO.2022 \

7. At this juncture, CASC the learned counscl for the petitioner while placing reliar.rce in Lhe Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu Vs. Central Bureau of Investigationr iL is submittcd Lhat thc passport authoril5z cannot refuse for renewal of the passport on the ground of pendency of the criminal case. Apart from the above, thc learned counsel seeking a direction to the authorities to lsslte emergency certificate as per Scction 4 of the passports Rules, 19gO this submission he placecl a copy of the order dated passed in W.p No. 10371 of 2O2S passed by rhis Court In support of

08.O4.2025 B. Insofar as issuarrce of direction rn respect of issuance of emergency certificate, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that Section 4, Schedule II l)art II of the Passports Rules, 19BO an emergency certificate may be issued for the purpose of travcl to Inclia and if the petitioner makes an application for issuance of emergency certificate, the samc r.r,cl uld bc considerecl by the authoritics and after the cerlificate is issucd, the petitioner can travel to India and contest the pending criminal case against him. I 202 I SCC Ont.ine sc 3 549 ) NVSK, J W.P. t{o.3783 of 2025 It is to bc seen that in the case of Vangala Kasturi (supra)'

9. the Hon'blc Supremc Court held at paras No 7 to 10 as under: 'lhe refusal ol a passport can be only rn "7. case where zu-r applicant is convicted during the periocl of 5 years immediately proceeding the date ol application for an offence involving moral tu rpitudc and sentence for imprisonment for not lcss Lhan tlvo Years' Scclron 6 2(f) relates to a situation where

8. thc applicant is facing trial in a criminal court' Admitt.cdly, at present' the conviction of the g. appellant stands stili the disposal of the criminal appeal. The scntcncs which he has to undergo rs lor a pcriod of one yeal' The passport authority cannot rcfusc thb renewa] of the passport on the ground o[ pendency of the criminal appeal' IO. 'lhc passport authority is directed to renew the passport of the applicant w1thout raising the objec[ion rdating to thc pendency of the crimina] appt:al in this Court Subject to the other conditions bcing fulhlled' the Interlocutory ApPlication stands disPosed of'" coun sel 1O. Havrng considcrcd the submissions made by the learned on r:iLhcr sidc and with their consent' taking lnto the lau, Iaid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the disposed of with the following consideratton case of suPra, lhis il'ril Petttlon IS conditions I (0 6 w.P. No.37a3 0t 202s an undertaking aiong with v Adciitional Metropolitan The petitioner shall su an affidavit before t, Magis trate-cum-Ju n ior Disrricr at L B iv,g* in l .l ;lrtii; "H11 ,::,:: No.275 o[ 2018), slarir reave rndia au.i,,g ;il;:l ir'::::::'::: ;l"Ii Permission of the Co urt zrnd the petitioner will coope rate rvith thc ,.. ial c.rrrt in concluding the criminal proceedings- (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (ui) -d !r, \ The Trial Court shall underraking .,.,,,* *,,n ll' ff;:itl1*',',rrr;: ::: weeks from the date of liling uf tf_r" ,rrO".tukllg. The peti tior-rer shall su aforesaid undertaking .,b-tt before tl,re concerned o.,ot* of his applicatior.r ror."r,t"oott tnt certified copy of the *'tt" the reply/ explanadon officer for consideration -u cl/reissuc of pa ssport. The Passport Aurhority shall consider the documents irr the lighr o[ rhc obsc we, as rhc und erta k,"-'::T ::r;'::.:'-.::""il1 ;; the petitioner. The pe titioncr shall also be at iiberty to rely on the decisions in this r<:gard. The Passport authority is directed Lo renew/reissue the passport of the petitione rr:rating ro rhe pendc".; ;t:;.:t.:ili::,t::;H::: beforc the .l.rial Court. The petitioner shall deposit tl,rc original passport belore the V Additional Metro Civir Jr-rdgc, *,,*" o"iJl'T",T::,:,:",:;"il:;:,; C.C. No.2942 of 2019 (Crime No.275 ot 20la), after renewal/ rcissue of the passport. (."ii) Thc pctirioncr shall be at liberty to file an applicatton h' \/ A(lditional Metropolitan Magistrate-cum- .-ludge' Ranga Reddv District at L B Nagar :::';.:;ir in CC. No2942 of ZOfS (Crime No'275 of 2018)' [ravei outside India' seeking permission to 'lhc V Aclclitional Metropolitan Magistrate-cum-Junior Civil .Juclgc, I?anga Reddy District at L'B' Nagar' shail consider the same in accordance with law'

11. Since it is submillcd [hat the petitioner is presently staylng rn USA anci his p:rssport is impounded by the authority and for compliancc of rhe a[orcsaid conditions' the petitioner is required to travel from USA to lnclia' the respondent No'3' Commissioner-cum- Regional PassporL Ollicer' is directed to communicate this order to the CGI, Congenciia' Ncrv York' for issuance of emergency certificate as per Section 4 ol tl-rc l)assports Rules' 1980' in accordance with law' within a periocl ol tr'r,'o r'veeks from the date of friing of application by the pctitione r, il atrv' enabling rhe petitioner to travel to India' 12. Accordinglv, Lhts u'ri1 pctition is disposed of' There shall be no order as to cosl s Asa scqucl, rntsccllaneous applications' if any pending' shali stand c [o scd SD/.L. VIJAYA LAXMI ASSI TANT REGISTRAR ---/ \ //TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER To ,l.TheSecretary,MinistryofExternalAffairsNorthBlock,TheUnionoflndia, New Delhi. Z. ifre priSecretary to Government Home Department, TS Secretariat, State of 3. The Cbmmissi-oner-Cum- Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport office, Telangana, Hyderabad. Chiranpur Lane, Begumpet, Secunderabad. ).;:.r .. -'-\- i .;l,, ----+---?*a& / { xiis3,"##',flJ:::si,i.B,f B jjj:f,f ru,,:",JTiJ,q;;fl,rlllf,i3!T;,,." iipffffi ,iill#rffi p.#;;H,,,:ffi a TJ k*:,;:r*r \ i a I * n L I It , F t , I I I * E i * I 4 a HIGH COURT NVSK,J DATED:01tOTt2O2S ORDER WP.No.3783 of 2O2S / Y oE I dc .\ fa () (J *

1.. ti!?<. - ],2 P 0 1 AU6 2025 * 'j-cH PA DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS o