Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
Setti Kiran Kumar, vs The Union Of India on 4 April, 2025
APHC010173122025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3331]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI
WRIT PETITION NO: 8888/2025
Between:
Setti Kiran Kumar, ...PETITIONER
AND
The Union Of India and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. A K KISHORE REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR HOME
2.
The Court made the following order:
The above writ petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents
in informing about the refusal to renew the petitioner‟s passport due to the
pendency of criminal case against the petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. Heard Sri A.K. Kishore Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri B.
Hanumantha Rao, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri Ajay,
learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, for respondents 3 and 4.
3. The petitioner is having a passport and since the period of the passport
is going to expire on 19.04.2025, made an application for reissuance/renewal
Page 2 of 5 SRS,J
W.P.No.8888 of 2025
of his passport bearing No.M7039357 vide TRN No.100026295400003 before
respondent No.2. As per the status report (Ex.P1), since an adverse report
was received from the Police, the petitioner was directed to produce the
Court‟s order for renewal of the passport.
4. Learned counsels for the respondents would submit that a case in crime
No.496 of 2021 was registered by Bhimavaram II Town Police Station, for the
offences punishable under Sections 498-A read with 34 of IPC and Sections 3
and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. In the said crime, the petitioner was shown
as accused No.4. Police filed charge sheet on the file of learned II Additional
Judicial First Class Magistrate (AJFCM), Bhimavaram, and the same was
numbered C.C.No.241 of 2022. In the charge sheet, the petitioner was shown
as „absconded‟.
5. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the
petitioner has been residing in Abu-Dhabhi and the petitioner‟s passport will
be expiring by 19.04.2025. Learned counsel would submit that the petitioner
will come down to India, will attend the Jurisdictional Court and thereafter will
make necessary application before the jurisdictional Magistrate, for renewal of
the passport.
6. Section 5 of the Passports Act, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as „the
Act‟), envisages applications for passports, travel documents etc. and others
thereon. Section 6 of the Act envisages refusal of passports, travel documents
etc.
7. Section 6 (2) (f) of the Act is extracted herewith:
(2) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the passport
authority shall refuse to issue a passport or travel document for visiting
any foreign country under clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section 5 on
Page 3 of 5 SRS,J
W.P.No.8888 of 2025
any one or more of the following grounds, and on no other ground,
namely:
........
(f) that proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been
committed by the applicant are pending before a criminal court in India;
8. Mere pendency of a criminal case does not mean that the guilt against
the accused is proved. The Hon‟ble Apex Court in Sumit Mehta v State of
NCT of Delhi, observed as follows:
“The law presumes an accused to be innocent till his guilt is proved. As
a presumable innocent person, he is entitled to all the fundamental
rights including the right to liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India.”
9. The Division Bench of the Hon‟ble Apex Court in its decision reported in
Satish Chandra Verma v. Union of India (UOI) and others, observed as
under:
“The right to travel abroad is an important basic human right for it
nourishes independent and self-determining creative character of the
individual, not only by extending his freedoms of action, but also by
extending the scope of his experience. The right also extends to private
life; marriage, family and friendship which are the basic humanities
which can be affected through refusal of freedom to go abroad and this
freedom is a genuine human right.”
10. In the case at hand, as seen from the material available on record, there
is no dispute regarding pendency of a criminal case against the petitioner in
C.C.No.241 of 2022, and arraying the petitioner as A4. In the charge sheet,
the petitioner was shown as „absconded‟. However, the petitioner is out of
India and is intending to visit India to approach the jurisdictional Court
Page 4 of 5 SRS,J
W.P.No.8888 of 2025
regarding the criminal case. To visit India, since the petitioner is in a foreign
country, he needs a passport.
11. Given the peculiar facts and circumstances, since the petitioner‟s
passport is expiring by 19.04.2025, learned respondent No.2 shall renew the
passport for a period of four months, in pursuance of application made by the
petitioner vide TRN No.100026295400003, enabling the petitioner to come
down to India and to appear before the jurisdictional Court and to make
necessary application before the jurisdictional Magistrate. Upon renewal of the
passport, for a limited period, the petitioner shall come down to India and
appear before the jurisdictional Magistrate and make necessary application.
12. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
SUBBA REDDY SATTI,J
Date : 04.04.2025
Furnish C.C. by 07.04.2025
B/o
ikn
Page 5 of 5 SRS,J
W.P.No.8888 of 2025
91
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI
WRIT PETITION NO: 8888/2025
Date : 04.04.2025
ikn
[ad_1]
Source link