Thoutam Rama Devi v. Union of lndia

circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2N respondent in withholding issuance/renewal of the petitioner's passport under File Nc H YJo 74 99 6532825 on the basis of an adverse police verification report due tc nistaken identity, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the )onstitution of lndia, and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to provisiona I , process and issue the passport to the petitioner. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the r ircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Corrr : may be pleased to suspend the operation and effect of the impugned commurr :ation issued by the 2nd respondent vide Letter Ref. No. SCN/1049327969I21 dated 11.06.2025, based on the adverse police verification report by directing 1t e 2nd respondent to provisionally process and issue the passport to the petitioner pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SIVA PRASAD ALLAPARTTI Counsel for the Respondents No.'l & 2: M/s. ANJALI AGAFI yAL, S.C. FOR CENTRAL GOVET NMENT Counsel for the Respondents No.3 to 5: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.6: - The Court made the following: ORDER HOT{'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BTIEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.237L7 of 2025 ORDER: Aggrieved by the action of respondent No.2 in withholding rssuance / renewal of the petitioner's passport under File No.HYJ074996532825 on the basis of an adverse police verification report due to mistaken identity, the present writ petition is filed. A consequential prayer is made to direct respondent No.2 to provisionally process and issue the passport to the petitioner.

2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for Central Government and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.

3. learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had applied for issuance of passport under File No.HYJ074996532425, dated O2.O5.2025, through Passport Seva Kendra, Hyderabad. After completing all formalities and police verification, the petitioner was issued a show cause notice dated 1L.O6.2O25 bearing Ref. No. SCN/1049327969/25 from respondent No.2 stating that an adverse police report had been received against the petitioner with reference to cnme No.469l2OO9 of Miyapur Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate. The petitioner has been arrayed as Accused No.2 in the said crime. It is further submitted that the 1 etitioner nor her husband have ever been involved in any criminal cas:. It appears tJ:rat the confusion has arisen due to the similarity of nz mes, resulting in mistaken identity. It is further submitted that the ro:re pendency of a criminal case, which is not grave or heinous in na:ure cannot be a ground for denial of passport, and the rejection viole tes the principles of naturaljustice.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the res;1 rend6nls submits that the respondents - passport authorities had acr ressed a letter / show cause notice dated 11.06.2025 to the petition:r, informing her that her police verification report was adverse due r< the pendency of the said criminal ca.se, and that clarifrcations / dc:uments may be submitted at tlle passport olhce during the notihed er quiry hours.

5. In view of the aforesaid show cause notice datr.r 1 1.06.2025 and in the interest of justice, this Court is of the opinic r that the matter can be appropriately dealt with by the passport ruthorities upon submission of clarifrcation by the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of .r ith the following directions: i) The petitioner is granted liberty to approach he Regional Passport Offrcer, Hyderabad, by way of a fresh r: tresentation along with all relevant documents, including rl :tails of the -/ pending criminal case and any court order or clarifications, in response to the letter dated I | .06.2025. (ii) Upon such approach, the Regional Passport Offrcer is directed to consider the petitioner's representation afresh, in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within four (04) weeks from the date of such representation. (iii) It is made clear that this Court has not elq)ressed y "t opinion on merits of the petitioner's eligibility for passport and that ttre authority shall consider the matter independently, based on facts and applicable legal provisions. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand clo_!94, SD/. K.BHAVANI SWAMY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To

1. The Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs' Union of lndia' South Block' New Delhi - 110O11,

2.TheReqionalPassportOfficer,RegionalPassport.Office'-Doorl"lo'8:2-215to ' i i6.'i",.ilfi;;d;;,5;r-.d;;;oad I Hvoeraoao - sooooe' relansana state' 3. The Cornmissioner of Police' Cyberabad Police Commissionerate' Gachibowli, Hyderabad - Telangana'

4. The Station House Officer, Commissionerate, Hyderabad' Miyapur Police Station, CYberabad

5. The Station House Officer' Women Police Station' Sangareddy' Sangareddy Police Station.

6. One CC to SRI SIVA PRASAD ALLAPARTHI' Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to M/s. ANJALI AGARWAL, S C' for Central Government [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUTI

9. Tvlro CD CoPies MP TKS +dl- I t HIGH COURT DAT | : D :09/09/2025 ( oR 1lt:Sh -)- 2 ) :t8 2026 + o,", * ORDER WP.No.23717 ot 2025 DISPOSING OF THE VI' RIT PETITION wtT{ouT cosTs $, \*