logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 MHC 4887 My Notes print Preview print print
Court : Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
Case No : W.P. (MD). No. 15452 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
Parties : S. Alaguraman Versus High Commission of India, Little India Unit 14-02, Singapore & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: S. Atham Ali, Advocate. For the Respondents: R2, B. Narayanan Ram, Central Government Standing Counsel, R1, R. Mohamed Riyaz, Government Advocate (criminal side).
Date of Judgment : 15-06-2026
Head Note :-
Constitution of India - Article 226 -
Judgment :-

(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to renew the petitioner's passport bearing No.C0290069 by considering his application No.25-2056384317 dated 22.12.2025, and for other reliefs within a period stipulated by this Court.)

1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for a direction to the second respondent to renew the passport bearing bearing No.C0290069 pursuant to the application dated 22.12.2025.

2. Learned Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the second respondent submitted that the petitioner's application for reissuance of passport had not been processed stating that a criminal case in Crime No.260 of 2022 is registered against the petitioner alleging that the petitioner had produced fabricated transfer certificate for obtaining earlier passport.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on the very same ground, the petitioner's application for re-issuance of passport was not processed. Hence, the petitioner approached this Court in W.P. (MD)No.5223 of 2024. This Court vide order dated 27.03.2024 held that when a case is pending only at the FIR stage, there is no impediment for the Passport authority to grant relief.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

5. The refusal to issue or renew a passport is governed by the provisions of the Passports Act, 1967. Under Section 6 of the Act, the Passport Authority is empowered to refuse issuance or renewal of a passport only on the grounds specifically enumerated therein. One such ground is where proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant are pending before a competent criminal court in India.

6. In the present case, the only reason cited by the respondents is the registration of FIR against the petitioner. However, mere registration of FIR does not fall within the grounds contemplated under Section 6 of the Act. The statutory bar arises only when criminal proceedings are pending before a competent criminal court.

7. Therefore, the action of the first respondent in withholding the petitioner’s application solely on the basis of the registration of FIR is not in consonance with the provisions of the Passports Act, 1967.

8. In view of the above, this Court finds merit in the petitioner’s contention. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the second respondent to process the petitioner’s application for renewal of passport bearing No.C0290069 in Application No.25-2056384317 dated 22.12.2025, and issue the passport, subject to the petitioner satisfying all other eligibility criteria prescribed under law.

9. The above exercise shall be completed within a period of two(2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

10. There shall be no order as to costs.
 
  CDJLawJournal