Mohammed Abdul Nayeem v. The Union of India

Telangana HC12 Mar 2025WP/7536/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition under Article 226 challenging refusal of passport due to pending criminal case. High Court directs release of passport with conditions: undertaking not to leave India without trial court permission, cooperation with trial, certified copy to be submitted to passport office. Relies on Supreme Court precedent Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu v. CBI (2020).

What did the court decide?

Release of passport within 3 weeks subject to conditions: petitioner to submit undertaking and affidavit before Senior Civil Judge, Vikarabad Court; Trial Court to issue certified copy within 1 week; petitioner to submit certified copy to Passport Officer; Passport Authority to consider documents in light of Supreme Court observations; petitioner at liberty to apply for permission to travel abroad. ¶¶61-¶63

Mohammed Abdul Nayeem Vs The Union of India — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶61-¶63

Issue for consideration

Whether the refusal of passport services by the Regional Passport Office based on pendency of a criminal case is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India and principles of natural justice. +1 more

¶¶14

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is disposed of with directions to the respondent authorities to release the petitioner's passport within 3 weeks from receipt of the order, subject to the petitioner submitting an undertaking and affidavit before the Senior Civil Judge, Vikarabad Court in S.C. No. 176 of 2013, stating that he will not leave India without permission and will cooperate with the trial court.

¶¶52-¶54

Key takeaways

The Trial Court shall issue a certified copy of the undertaking and affidavit within 1 week from the date of filing.ratio¶¶54
The petitioner shall submit the certified copy of the undertaking along with reply/explanation before the concerned Passport Officer for consideration of his application for release of passport.ratio¶¶55
The Passport Authority shall consider the documents in light of the observations made by the Courts as well as the undertaking and other documents filed by the petitioner, including the Supreme Court's findings in Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu v. CBI.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

The High Court of Telangana disposed of a writ petition challenging the refusal of passport services due to pendency of a criminal case. Following its earlier order in W.P.No.34138 of 2024 and the Supreme Court's decision in Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu v. CBI, the Court directed the passport authority to release the passport within three weeks, subject to the petitioner furnishing an undertaking and affidavit before the trial court (Senior Civil Judge, Vikarabad) stating he would not leave India without permission and would cooperate with the trial. The trial court was directed to issue a certified copy within one week. The petitioner may also apply to the trial court for permission to travel abroad.

¶1

[³²⁵⁵ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N,V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO :7536 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mohammed^ Abdu.l..Nayeem, S/o_ Abdul Mohammed Aziz, Aged about 4g years, Occ Social Worker, Rlo.3-2-18514, Khan Colony, TandurlT.S.

¶9

AND

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

1 I1"_ llipl^of .lndia,^{The Joint Secretary pSp andCentral passport} Officer PSP Division, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi.

¶12

1. The Regional Passport Office, Hydi:rabad D. No. 8-2-215 to 21g, Kummaguda, Secunderabad-500003, T.S.

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition under Article 226 ot the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of wRlr oF MANDAMUS against the 2nd respondent in refusing passport services to the petitioner vide its order dated 21-02-2025, in his passport application No. HY1077429868i2s on account of pendency of a criminal case vide Cr. No. 138 ot2011, and later police filed charge sheet vide S.C. No. 176 of 20'13, and same is still pending before the Hon'ble Senior civil Judge, Vikarabad court, as the same is illegal arbitrary and violative of Article 14, 1g and 21 of the constitution of lndia and the against the principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the order dated 21-02-2025 issued in respect of the passport application No. HY 1077 429868'125 and direct the 2nd Respondent to issue fresh passport to the petitroner for a period of^.10 years

¶15

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶16

Petition under section i 51 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to pass an interim direction to the 2nd respondent to renew the petitioner passport vide application HY1077429868125, dated 21-02_2025, for a period of .10 years

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt. SYED JAWEED ABBAS NADEEM FOR SRI K.L.N. RAGHAVENDRA REDDY

¶18

Counsel for the Respondents: SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR Dy. SOLtctTOR GEN. OF tNDtA

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.7536 of 2025

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.K.L.N.Raghavendra Reddy, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondents. With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is being taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶23

This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:-

¶24

"to declre the action of tlu 2"a respontlent in ret'using passport seruices to tle petitioner oide its order dated 2'1.02.2025, in his pnssport npplicntion No.HY1077429868125 on nccumt of pendency of n Criminal Case uide Cr.No.138 of 201.1, nnd lnter police filed charge sheet t;ide S,C No.176 of 2013, and same is still pending bafore the HonbLe Senior Cioil lttdge, Viknrobad Court as the sante is ilLegal, arbitrary and oiolatioe of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and the agtinst the principles of naturnl justice and consequently sct aside the order dated 21.02.2025 issued itt respect of tlte passport application No.HY7077429868125 and dircct tlrc 2,1d Respondent to issue fresh passport to the petitioner for a peiod. of 10 years."

¶25

Today when the matter has been taken up for hearing, learned counsel

¶26

for the petitioner would submit that in similar circumstances, this Court has passed an order in W.P.No.34138 of 2024 dated 05.1,2.2024 and the operative

¶27

portion of the said order is as follows:

¶28

"5. ln aietrt of the abotte said submissions, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the zuit petition in terms of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.2802 of 2024, dated 1.4.03.2024 subject to the follorLting conditions-

¶29

Tfu pefilioner shall submit nn underlaking, along uith nn at'fdaait in C.C.No.1367 of 2021 in tY fi, of Jud.icial First Class Magistrrfte, Choutuppnl, Yadadri District, stating that he toilt

I t

i ha

..1..

nol Lcaoe lntlin during pendency of thc saitl case trtlltotLl pernission of tlu Court and that he toill coopcrnte ruith tlrc Trial Court in concbLding the lti)irpdings^{tn thasaid cnse.}

¶34

l)n.ftlirrg of such nn undertttking as toell as nll'ithutt, the Trial Court slull issue a ce.rtif.ed copy oJ' llu: snmc to the petitioner ui thin a period of tzio (0)) rueeks therefront.

¶35

Ilrc pctitioner shnll submit certifed copy oJ the a.fo n'snid undertnking before the porrpor:t- OXir* for..tssunncc^{of his passport} nntl the paiilrort O]licer shnll constder the applicatiot No 11YA076801766924 dated 31.07.2024 subttttted by the petitioner in accordance uith Lnttt, tt'tlltitt ttoo (02) zueeks fronr the tlnte of atbmission of sttclt unlcrtaking.

¶36

r\n issrtrtttct of passport, tha petitioner shalL dalnsit tlut sanrc beforc the Trial Court in C.(',\Jo136/ o.f 2021 on the fle of ludicial First Chss Mngistrate, Choutuppal, yaritrdri District. Ho.L,euer, liberty is granted to the petitioner to f le an applicntiorr bet'ore tlrc Trial Court seeking pennission to trnocl abroatl and it is for the Triil Cottrl srtkittg pt,rtnission to lrnud abiond and it s .for^{llu' 'lrinl Oourt to considcr} tlrc same in ncao rdtrn(c taith lnto.

¶37

Actordingly, this rurit petition is disposcd of. There shall be no ortfur ns to costs."

¶38

Learned⁽ ounsel for the pctitioner pray this Cotrrt to pass similar

¶39

order

¶40

Learned stancling counsel appearing on ber'rarf of respondent Nos.1

¶41

and 2 reported no object on in passing similar orders.

¶42

Accordinglv, this n'rit petition is disposed of with a direction to

¶43

respondent auth.rities kr considcr the case of the petitioner and take steps for

I I

I I

::3::

release of the passport in due compliance of the^findings of^{the Hon'ble}

¶50

Supreme Court in the case of Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu v. Central

¶51

Bureau of Investigationl. The directions are as follows:

¶52

(i) The respondent authorities shali release the petitioner's Passport within 3 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Respondents shall inJorm the petitioner of the time and place for the release of Passport.

¶53

(ii) The petitioner shall submit an undertaking along with an a{fidavit before the Senior Civil Judge, Vikarabad Court, in S.C.No.176 of 2073, stating that the petitioner will not leave India during pendency of the S.C. without permission of the Court and the petitioner will cooperate with the Trial Court in concluding thc criminal proceedings.

¶54

(iii) The Trial Court shall issue a certified copy of the undertaking and affidavit within 1 week from the date of filing of the undertaking.

¶55

(iv) The petitioner shall submit the certified copy of the aforesaid undertaking along with the reply/explanation before the concerned Passport Officer for consideration of his application for release of passport.

¶56

(v) The respondent authorities shall be at liberty of taking steps on breach of the undertaking.

¶57

(vi) The Passport Authority shall consider the documents in the light of the obscrvations made by the Courts as well as the undertaking and other documents filed by the petitioner. The

¶58

'^{2020 crl.L.J.(sc)572}

¶59

ii4:..

¶60

petitioner shall also be at liberty to rely on the decisions in this regarcl. I'hc petitioncr shall be at liberty to file an application before tlrc Senior Civil Judge, Vikarabad Court seeking permission to travcl outside India. The learned Senior Civil Judge,^\zikarabat{ Court, shall consider the same in accorclance with lan,.

¶61