IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 17526 of 2008 Between: Gudipati Swapna W/o. Gudipati Srinivas R/o.H.No.3-5-200/2, Jammigadda, Suryapet Town, Nalgonda District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintendent of Police, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. 2 The Station House Officer, Suryapet Town P.S., Suryapet, Nalgonda District. 3 The Regional Passport Officer, Office at Secunderabad, A.P. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in not taking ay action on the representation submitted by the petitioner on 25.07.2008 for impounding the passport of the Accused Nos. 2 and 3 in connection with Cr.No.214/2008 on the ﬁle of the 2nd respondent for the oﬀence U/Sec. 498-A of I.P.C. and Sec. 3 & 4 of D.P.Act, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to forthwith impound / seize the passport of Accused Nos.2 and 3, and to grant such other relief or reliefs. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.PALLENAGESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 17526 of 2008 O R D E R: The petitioner herein claims to have made a representation dated 25-07-2008 before the third respondent-Regional Passport Oﬃcer, requesting to impound/seize the passports of accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.214 of 2008 on the ﬁle of the Station House Oﬃcer, Suryapet Town Police Station. This writ petition is ﬁled on 05-08-2008 aggrieved by the alleged inaction on the part of the third respondent. The third respondent-Regional Passport Oﬃcer ﬁled a counter aﬃdavit denying the alleged inaction and further stating that no matter is pending before any criminal Court warranting impounding of the passport. As per Clause 10 (3)(e) of the Passports Act, 1967, if proceedings in respect of an oﬀence alleged to have been committed by the holder of the passport is pending before a criminal Court in India, it is a ground for impounding the passport. In the case on hand, as could be seen from the material placed before this Court, on the basis of a complaint lodged by the petitioner alleging oﬀence under Section 498-A of IPC, Crime No.214 of 2008 has been registered and the matter is still under investigation. Hence, the third respondent, cannot be found fault with in not taking steps for impounding the passport of the accused Nos.2 and 3. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, this shall not preclude the petitioner to initiate fresh proceedings, in case necessity thereof arises. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI,J Date: 09-09-2008 KLP