Disposed¶32

Bachkore Asif v. the Union of India

Andhra Pradesh HC13 Jul 2026WP/18950/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Passport reissue withheld; surname withheld; Regional Passport Officer; application No.VJ1077579227325 dated 29.04.2025; Calendar Case/C.C.No.117 of 2025 pending; Judicial First Class Magistrate, Gooty; No Objection Certificate; Article 226 Constitution of India; writ petition disposed at admission stage; liberty to apply for NOC; no order as to costs; miscellaneous applications closed; Justice Ravi Cheemalapati; 14 July 2026; WRIT PETITION NO: 18950/2026; APHC010353662026; Bachkore Asif; Union of India; Andhra Pradesh High Court Amaravati.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to make an appropriate application before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Gooty, for issuance of a 'No Objection Certificate' for reissuance of his passport; no order as to costs; miscellaneous applications, pending if any, stand closed.

Bachkore Asif Vs the Union of India — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶32

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of the 2nd respondent (Regional Passport Officer) in withholding the petitioner's surname and the reissue of his passport, sought vide application No.VJ1077579227325 dated 29.04.2025, is illegal and arbitrary.

¶25

Court's answer

Criminal proceedings can be said to have commenced only after the competent Court has taken cognizance of the offence, and issuance/renewal of a passport thereafter depends upon the concerned Court granting a No Objection Certificate or appropriate permission.

¶29

Ratio / Principle

Having regard to the pendency of C.C.No.117 of 2025 against the petitioner and his intention to file an application before the concerned Court, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission itself, granting the petitioner liberty to make an appropriate application before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Gooty, for issuance of a 'No Objection Certificate' for reissuance of his passport.

¶32

Key takeaways

There shall be no order as to costs.ratio¶32
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.ratio¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Andhra Pradesh High Court (Amaravati, Special Original Jurisdiction), single judge (Justice Ravi Cheemalapati), 14 July 2026, Writ Petition No.18950/2026: Bachkore Asif v. Union of India and others. The petitioner, against whom Calendar Case No.117 of 2025 was pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Gooty, challenged under Article 226 the 2nd respondent's withholding of his surname and of reissue of his passport sought vide application No.VJ1077579227325 dated 29.04.2025, alleging the action to be illegal and arbitrary. Noting the settled position that criminal proceedings commence only upon cognizance being taken by the competent Court and that renewal of a passport thereafter depends on the concerned Court granting a No Objection Certificate or permission, and counsel having sought liberty to approach the trial Court, the Court disposed of the writ petition at the admission stage itself, granting liberty to apply to the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Gooty for an NOC for reissuance of the passport; no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous applications closed.

¶1

APHC010353662026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

[3332]

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 14^th DAY OF JULY 2026

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 18950/2026

Between:

1. BACHKORE ASIF, AS

...PETITIONER

AND

THE UNION OF INDIA, AS

¶13

THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICIER, S

¶14

THE SUPERITENDENT OF POLICE, S

¶15

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶18

1.RAMAKRISHNA AKURATHI

¶19

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶20

1.GP FOR HOME

¶21

¶22

The Court made the following:

¶23

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

To declare the action of the 2^nd respondent in withholding the surname and reissue passport vide application No.VJ1077579227325 dated 29.04.2025, as illegal and arbitrary, the present writ petition is filed.

¶26

Heard Sri Akurathi Rama Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri K.Venkateswarulu, learned Central Government Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2 and Sri V.Farook, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondent Nos.3 & 4.

¶27

After arguing the matter for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner sought liberty to file an appropriate application before the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Gooty.

¶28

Perusal of the material available on record shows that Calendar Case No.117 of 2025 is pending against the petitioner on the file of the Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Gooty.

¶29

The Hon’ble Supreme Court, as well as various High Courts, have consistently held that criminal proceedings can be said to have commenced only after the competent Court has taken cognizance of the offence and the issuance of renewal of a passport would thereafter depend upon the concerned Court granting No Objection Certificate or appropriate permission.

¶30

¶31

Taking the facts and circumstances of the case into consideration and having regard to the fact that C.C.No.117 of 2025 is pending against the petitioner and that the petitioner intends to file an application before the concerned Court, this Court is inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition at the stage of admission itself.

¶32

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to make an appropriate application before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Gooty, for issuance of ‘No Objection Certificate’ for reissuance of his Passport. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶33

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶34

_____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

¶35

Date: 14^th July, 2026 RKS

¶36

Whether the order is:

¶37

Speaking	Reasoned
Reportable	Non-reportable

Bachkore Asif v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bachkore Asif v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s. Kalyani Constructions, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

M/s. Sri Sainath Infra Projects Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Mr. Narendra Kumar Shah, Vs The Life Insurance Corporation of India

Ravuri Venkateswarlu Vs Sri Budithi Rajsekhar

Killi Seshu Mohan Appala Naidu Vs Andhra Bank

Sri Venkateswar Constructions Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh