Madras High Court
Meiyappan vs The Regional Passport Officer on 17 November, 2025
Author: M.Dhandapani
Bench: M.Dhandapani
WP No. 43686 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17-11-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
WP No. 43686 of 2025
Meiyappan
Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Regional Passport Officer
Tiruchirapalli,
New Municipal Complex
Thillainagar 7th Cross,
Thiruchirapalli 620 018
2.The Sub Inspector of Police
Perambalur Police Station,
Peramablur 621 212.
Respondent(s)
PRAYER;This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India,
to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to re-issue passport
to petitioner by considering petitioner application dated 06.10.2025 in
application no TR 2077379357125.
For Petitioner(s): Mr.K.Thenrajan
For Respondent: Mr.S.Srivatsav, CGSC R1
Mr.S.Balaji, GA (Crl. Side) R2
ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking a direction to the 1st respondent to
re-issue passport to petitioner by considering petitioner application dated
06.10.2025 in application no TR 2077379357125.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/11/2025 02:47:33 pm )
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner made application for
renewal of passport on 06.10.2025. On 13.10.2025 the first respondent issued a
show cause notice stating that a criminal case in Cr.No.164 of 2021 is pending
against the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner's application is kept pending
without any progress and no final report has been passed so far. Hence, the
petitioner has filed the present writ petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue involved
in the present Writ petition is no longer res integra and the similar issue has
already been decided by the Hon'ble First Bench of this Court in WA.
No.902/2023 dated 02.06.2023 wherein this Court held that mere pendency of
the criminal case is not a bar for renewal of the passport. If the person wants to
travel abroad, he has to get necessary permission from the Court, where the
criminal case is pending.
4. The learned counsel for the first respondent has not objected the
submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the fact that the petitioner has made application for
issuance of passport and the same is kept pending without any progress. In this
background, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the decision
rendered by the Hon'ble First Bench of this Court in WA.902 of 2023 dated
02.06.2023.
7. This Court perused the judgment passed by this Court and the relevant
paragraphs are extracted herein;
''5. A Division Bench of the Bombay High
Court, in the case of Abbas Hatimbhai Kagalwala v.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/11/2025 02:47:33 pm )
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.
6. The 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.
7. In 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.''
8. Since the present issue is also one and the similar, this Writ Petition is
disposed of with the following directions:
''(i) The first respondent is directed to process the application
of the petitioner without insisting the permission of the Court, as
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/11/2025 02:47:33 pm )
there is no criminal case pending against the petitioner before any
Court; and
(ii) If any case is pending before any Court, which has not been
brought to the notice of the petitioner., the 1st respondent shall
communicate the same to the petitioner and call upon him to seek
necessary permission from the said Court and file the same before
the 1st respondent.''
9. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is
disposed of. No costs.
17-11-2025
Rli
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Internet:Yes
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
To
1.The Regional Passport Officer
Tiruchirapalli,
New Municipal Complex
Thillainagar 7th Cross,
Thiruchirapalli 620 018
2.The Sub Inspector Of Police
Perambalur Police Station,
Peramablur 621 212.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/11/2025 02:47:33 pm )
M.DHANDAPANI J.
rli
17-11-2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/11/2025 02:47:33 pm )
