✦ High Court of India · 10 Sep 2025

Suresh Kumar Veeramallu v. 1. The tvlinistry of External Affairs

Case Details High Court of India · 10 Sep 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
10 Sep 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,221 words

7. The Station House Officer, Siddipet 3 town PS, Siddipet. 8. Aruna Mallareddygari, W/o Mallareddygari Surender Reddy, Aged about 42yea$, Occ Private Employee, R/o H.No.19-121/1/A, Srinivas Nagar, Siddipet town and District. (R8 is impleaded as per Court Order dated 01.09.2025 in l.A.No.2/2025) .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 of l6e Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit flled therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction moro partrcularly one in the nature of Writ of lvlandamus declaring the action of the 'espondents No 4 and 5 in non considering the application of the petitioner vide application reference No. HY8067021315524 daled 14-10-2024 and non-initiatin.l tr grant the passport to the petitioner and rejecting the Passport application of tl-re petitioner without any valid reason is rllegal. arbitrary, u nconstitut iona l, violat on of provisions of passport act, Principles of Natural Justice and in violation of Articles 14,16,21 of the Constrtution of lndia, apart from violation of Provisions of Passport Act, consequently direct the respondent No.4 and 5, to granl the passport to me, basing on my applicalion vide application reference No. HYI106702131 5524 dated 14-10-2024. |.A.NO:1 OF 2025 Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the ( rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Corrrt may be pleased to direct the respondent No.4 and 5, to grant the passport to me, basing on my application vide application reference No. HY8067021315',2.1 dated 14-10-2024. pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 6 : SRI PULIMAMID SHASHIDHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.7 : G.P FOR HOME The Court made the following ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.23720 0F 2o2s ORD ER: The present writ petition is filed seeking a direction to Respondents Nos.4 and 5 to consider the petitioner's application for issuance of a passport vide reference No. HYBO67021315524 dated l4-lO-2O24, and to declare the action of the respondents in not considering and rejecting the same as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 2l of the Constitution of India and the provisions of the Passport Act, 1967.

2. Heard Sri Rapolu Bhaskar, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri P. Shashidhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Central Government, for respondent Nos. 1 to 6 and learned Government Pleader for Home, for respondent No.7.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a resident of Siddipet and doing Kirana business for the last 30 years. He submits that the petitioner has applied for a passport for the purpose of undertaking a tour to Sri Lanka and Bhutan. He submits that although the petitioner has made an application in this regard on l4-1O-2O24, the same has not been processed and was r,ltim.ately rejected on 03-12-2024 by the respondent-passport 2 authorities citing a pe nding criminal case in t._,.r .No.,I2O / 2023 registered under Sectio ns 442 , 422 read with 34 :rf Indian penal Code (lPC). He submits that the said criminal cast: ir; a petty and - compoundable offence, registered on a false com:rl:,rint, and the matter is pending bcfore the principal Junior Cr,,.il Judge_cum_ Judicial Magistrate of Firsr Class, Siddipet in CC Nc .t6212024. He submits that the petitioner is arrayed as accused No. 2 in the said case and is regularly attending the Court. He furtl-i::r submits that mere pendency of a criminal case which is not gravr. ,rr heinous in nature cannot bc a ground for denial of passport, aecl the rejection violates the principles of natural justice.

4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsr:l f<rr respondent Nos. 1 to 6 submits t.hat the respondents-passport artthorities has addressed a letter dated O3.12.2O24 Lo Lhe petitioner, informing him that his police verification report was adverse due to t h,: pendency of the said criminal case, and that clarilications/docr_Lments may be submitted at the Passport Office during the notified c-rquiry hours.

5. In view of the aforesaid letter daled 03.12.2-)2 I and in the interest of justice, this Court is of the opinion that th,: rnatter can be appropriately dealt with by the passport authorities r-r1ton submission of clarification by rhe petitioner. \i l

6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: 1 The petitioner is granted liberty to approach the Regional Passport Ofhcer, Hyderabad, by way of a fresh representation along with all relevant documents, including details of the pending criminal case and any court orders or clarifications, in response to the letter dated 03.12.2024. 2 Upon such approach, the Regional Passport Officer is directed to consider the petitioner's representation afresh, in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within four (4) weeks from the date of such representation. a It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's eligibiiity for passport and that the authority shall consider the matter independently, based on facts and applicable legal provisions. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. No costs. //TRUE COPY// SD/. M LLIKARJUNA RAO S NT REGISTRAR ECTION OFFICER To 1 2 3 The Ministry of External Affairs, Union of lndia. New elhi The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Department. Secretariat, Hyderabad. Offrcer onSpecial Duty (Passport Seva Duty), OSD (PSD) and amp. Project Director, PSP Division, Ministry of External Affairs, Patiala House, Tilak lvlarg, New Delhi-l 10001 . Delhi-1 10001 'il1?:..ii!'Fx?::,Tf#i:::d:H._T:,TtsJ[,Tlit1,i,i?;if, 5. The Reqional passoort Office. Hyderabad, D.No.B_2_2 I 5 TO, 219. - Kummarg uda Sectrnderabro. 16l"rg1"#s6rjoo: 6. The public Grievance Oticer, pSCOivi;; M _ No.za, Faliala'"r-iJrse-.rirak_r\,4ars, New o"[ri_r i|rJilr]t 7. The Station House ( 8.i*:t'6t%t%'F"'{i,Zr?:tltfl B:",XHi;".3,oJl".l,,",ansanaat 9. One CC to Snl RAp I e e n" a a i; 5 ii i ;'0t,?,1,r?i1 t,fffi ,a?-,,f &,[?gsi ! i o, o . Two CD Copies I '1 33,",.1,;r E (ternar Affairs, Room "u, " to p u c] SA GJP HIGH COURT DATE D : 1 010912025 I \ ORDER WP.No.23720 of 2025 I I / ' ' ,'/, ,: .' :r- 1,i 2[ i r'^ \^"t \.1 r- \--'- ;\ Ii1,p zlm -:

9., , . , ri--i DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. a w

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