Pl.Ramesh v. The Regional Passport Officer

ORDER This Writ Petition has been filed seeking the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to renew the petitioner's passport No.J1159295 enabling him to go to abroad to overcome his family situation on the basis of the representation dated 16.06.2026.

2.Heard Mr.R.Sivalingam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.R.Mohamed Riyaz, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), who accepts notice on behalf of the second respondent.

3.Since no adverse order is going to be passed against the first respondent, notice to the first respondent is dispensed with.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had applied for renewal of a fresh passport. However, the application has not been processed on the ground that criminal cases are pending against the petitioner.

5.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the second respondent submitted that criminal cases are pending against the petitioner and that the same are under investigation.

6.Mere pendency of criminal proceedings cannot be a bar to the consideration of the petitioner's application for the issuance of a passport by the first respondent.

7.The issue involved in the present case is no longer res integra. An identical issue has already been decided by the Hon'ble First Bench of this Court in W.A.No.902 of 2023 [The Regional Passport Officer, Chennai v. Samsudeen Mohamed Salih and another], by judgment dated

02.06.2023, the relevant portion of which is extracted hereunder: ''5. A Division Bench of the Bombay High Court, in the case of Abbas Hatimbhai Kagalwala v. State of Maharashtra and another, 2022 SCC OnLine Bom 1992, to which one of us (S.V.Gangapurwala, CJ.) was a party, has followed the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu, supra and directed the respondent therein to process the application of the petitioner for renewal of the passport.

¶6The contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the first respondent cannot travel abroad without the permission of the Court where the criminal case is pending, would not be an impediment for the passport authority to consider the application for renewal of the passport. No doubt, if the first respondent has to travel abroad and the criminal case is pending, then unless the Magistrate or the Sessions Court where the criminal case is pending permits the first respondent to travel abroad, he cannot travel abroad.

¶7In the light of the above, we pass the following order:

(i) The writ appellant shall process the application of the first respondent for renewal of passport without insisting for permission of the Court, where a criminal case is pending against the first respondent. If the first respondent is travelling abroad, then the first respondent would be required to seek permission from the Court where the criminal case is pending.

(ii) Decision shall be taken as above, within one month.''

¶8Following the aforesaid decision, the first respondent is directed to process the petitioner's passport application without insisting upon an order or permission from the jurisdictional criminal Court where the investigation is pending against the petitioner, and to take an appropriate decision on the application, on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, if the petitioner intends to travel abroad, it is open to the petitioner to obtain the necessary permission from the jurisdictional criminal Court before undertaking such travel.

¶9With the above observations and directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

17.07.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No TSG To

1.The Regional Passport Officer, Passport Office, Trichy.

2.The Inspector of Police, Karaiyar Police Station, Pudukkottai District.

M.DHANDAPANI, J. TSG

17.07.2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI PL.Ramesh ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Regional Passport Officer, Passport Office, Trichy. 2.The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Inspector of Police, Karaiyar Police Station, Pudukkottai District. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to renew the petitioner's passport No.J1159295 enabling him to go to abroad to overcome his family situation on the basis of the representation dated 16.06.2026. For Petitioner : Mr.M.R.Sivalingam For Respondents : Mr.R.Mohamed Riyaz (R2) Government Advocate (Criminal Side)