✦ High Court of India · 08 Apr 2025

Anjan Kumar Tanneeru v. The Union of lndia

Case Details High Court of India · 08 Apr 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
08 Apr 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,456 words

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitutipn of lndia praying that in the circum$tances stated.in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court Fay be pleased To issue writ, order or direction in thg nature of Writ of Mandamqq declaring lhe action of the 2nd respondent as commupicatQd in the,ir letter vide HYD/301POL/PlCl23A2A2A dated 0410312025, confirming thg impounding of the petitioner's passport as peJ the letter dated 02-0-5-2024 uidP Ref. No 1MPt317823623t24 in File No US7074538587121 concerning'Pgssport No V2862627 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, violative of principles of natural justice, violating provisions of Passports Act, 1967, violative of Articles 14 and 21 ol constitution of lndia and set aside the same lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petitian under Section 15'l CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased !o suspend the order of the 2nd respondent as communicated in lheir letter vide I HYDi30iPoL/P1c123812023 dated 04t03t2o25, confirming the impounding of the petitioner's passport as per the letter dated 02-05-2024 vide Ref. No. lMP1317823623124 tn File No. U57074538587121 concerning passport No. V2862627 the pendrng disposal of the above writ petition Cqunset for the Petitioner:SRl. P VISHNUVARDHANA REDDy Counsel for the Respondgntq; SRt gADt PRAyEEN IUMAR Deputy Soticitqr General of lndia The Cqurt rngde the foltawingi ORAEB i , HONOURABLE SRI IUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR. WRIT PETITION No.9252 of 2025 7 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, Deputy Solicitor General of India appcaring on behalf of respondents. With the consent of the parties, thc writ pctition is being taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself

2. This writ petition is filed seeking thc following prayer:- "to declare tlte actiott o.f tlx'2^t respondert as commttnicated in their letter t,ide HYD/30/POL/PIC/8BQ023 dsted 04/03202s, confrming tlrc impotrnLling of llrc yetitioners passpolt ns per the letter dated 02/052.024 uide Rtt.f No.lMP/31782j623[2.4 in File No.U57074538587121 concerning Pnssport No.V2862627 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, uiolntiue of pnnciples of natural justice, ttiolatin| proztisions oJ Pnssports Act, 7967, ttiolntit:e of Articles 14 and 21 of constitution of ltulit nnd sel aside tlu same."

3. Brief facts in this writ petition as stated are that petitioner's bother in law got married to onc Ms.Saipriya and later when some family disputes arose between them, Ms.Saipriya on 10.01.2023, filed criminal case under Section 498,{ IPC, Sec 3 and 4 of DP Act, before the Police Station, Narsapur, against her husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law, sister-inJaw and the petitioner. It is submitted that the Police, without any proper investigatiory included petitioner and other family member names in the charge sheet and later, the concerned Court had issued Non Bailable Warrants (NBWs). Subsequentiy, respondent No.2 issued show cause notice bearing No.SCN/31776n$/24 datcd 26.04.2024, and directed the petitioner to -.- ,1 i i22i submit explanation as to why action should not be take. to impound the passport. Thereafter, the petitioner on 29.04.2024 submitted a detailed explanation. However, without considering the same, respondent No.2 . issued another Ietter bearing No.lMp/317823623/24 dated 02.05.2024, stating the following:- 'As per.Hon'ble Court of lunior Ciail ludge cunt Jtttlicinl Mngistrate of First Clnss, Narsapur directions, it has been decided to impountl ttre passport benring Passport No.V2862627 issued on dntc 06.10.202-l under sections 10 (3) (e) €t (h) of Passports Act, 1967 ,,

4. Challenging the same, petitioner along with other family members filed W.P.Nos.14370, 14387 and 14588 of 2024 and this Court ,,i/e .ommon order dated 25.07.2024, passed the following order:- "8. In uieu of thr said submissions and since it is the case of tlu petitioners tlnt respondent No.2 has issued impugned ktters rlaterl 02.05.2024, tL,ithout considering their etplanation, tlut impugnetl letters z'ide Nos.lMP/37782i43924, IMp/31782357g/2i -and IMP/31/82362324, dated 02.05.2024 are set nside nnd tlr rL:spontlents are directed to consider the e-xplanation, dated 29.04.2024 srhrnittetl by tlu petitioners and pass appropriate orders irt nL:cordnntrt toitlt Into, toithin a period of four (4) weeks from thz date of receipt of n copy of this order.. Till such time, respondent No.2 is directctl not to coercixe action on the passports of the petitioners. 9. With thb abooe directions, all the uit petitions are nllotoetl. There shall be no order as to costs." 'tike

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.2 issued letter bearing No.FIYD/3O/ pOL / pIC / 238 / 2023 dated O4.0Z.ZO'25, wherein it is stated that since there is no response from the petitioner on the show cause notice dated 26.04.2024, the petitioner,s passport is impounded by this office. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed. ,'r' \ ::3:: 6 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the impugned letter dated 04.03.2025, the respondent No.2 failed to observe that the Petitioner on

29.04.2024 had submitted a detailed explanation on show cause notice dated

26.04.2024 and without considering the same and the common order dated

25.07.2024 passed in W.P.Nos.14370, 14387 and 14588 of 2024, the respondent No.2 impounded the petitioner's passport. Hence, pray this Court to set aside the impugned letter dated M.03.2025.

7. Learned standing counsel appearing for respondents fairly submits that in the letter dated M.03.2025, there is no mention whether the respondents had received the petitioner's explanation dated 29.04.2024 a,nd further submits that if the petitioner makes a fresh explanation, the respondent authorities would consider the same and pass orders in accordance with law.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the letter dated

04.03.2025 is not a reasoned order, the same is liable to be set aside and pray this Court to set aside the impugned letter dated 04.03.2025 enabling the petitioner to submit fresh explanation to the show cause notice dated

26.04.2024 and further pray this Court to direct the respondent authorities to consider the same and pass orders in a time bound period.

9. Recording the above submissions and in view of the fact that the respondent No.2 in the letter dated 04.03.2025. failed to observe that the I I --r \ : i422 petitioner on 29.04.2024 submitted explanation to the show cause notice d'ated' 26.04.2024 and since the letter dated 04.03.2025 is not in line to the common order dated 25.07.2024 passed in w.p.Nos.14370 , r13g7 and145gg of 2024, this C.urt deems it fit to set aside the impugned retter dated 04.03.202s. Accordingly. the impugned letter dated 04.03.2025 is hereby set aside and 'this writ petition is disposed of ganting liberty to the petitioner to submit fresh explanation to the show cause notice dated 26.04.2024, within a period of one (1) week from the date of receipt of copy of this order ancl thercafter in the light of the common order dated, 25.07.202_4 passed in W.p.Nos.14370, 14387 and 14588 of 2024, the respondent authorities are directed to consider the petitioncr's explanation and pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (03) months and communicate the same to the petitioncr.

10. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Miscellancous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. No costs. SD/-L. LAKSHMI BABU //rRUE coPYtt n ttl--'l" i*':t-ll--- ; t \ sEcIoNoFFtcER To,

1. The Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs At New 2. The Re.gional P_assp,ort Officer, Door Nc 8-2-215 to 2'lg, Kummarguda, Secundrabad, Pin 5000Q3, Telangana

3. Commissiongr of lmmigration Bureau of lmmigration, East Block, Vlll Level V Sector - l, R.K. Puiam, Ngw Dqlhi 4 One CC to SRl. P VISHNUVARDHANA REDDY Advocate IOPUCI 5. One CC to SRl. cADl PRAVEEN KUMAR Deputy Solicitor Generat of tndia IoPUCI \ 6 Two CD Copies KKS BS ?r(q I HIGH COURT ii. I I DATED:0810412025 HC. SIAI ( 1 ( r , C o o 2 I t'lAY 2025 I f) t: s Pnr cH gO ORDER WP.No.9252 of 2025 DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ep\q\ )-{

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments