[Cites 14, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
S.Nithin Karthick vs The Regional Passport Officer on 25 February, 2026
Author: P.T.Asha
Bench: P.T. Asha
WP No. 6393 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 25-02-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA
WP No. 6393 of 2026
AND
WMP NO. 6941 OF 2026
S.Nithin Karthick
S/o. SRINIVASAN,
No. 22/54 Syed Abdulla Street,
Anna Salai, Chennai 02
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Regional Passport Officer
Regional passport office,
Chennai 02
2. The superintendent of Police
Passport Verification cell,
Chennai
3. The Sub Inspector
F-4 Thousand lights police station,
Chennai
..Respondent(s)
Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to
process and issue passport to the petitioner in respect of Passport Application
__________
Page1 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 01:44:42 pm )
WP No. 6393 of 2026
File No. MA2075867492825 within a time frame by considering the petitioners
explanation dated 5.01.2026.
For Petitioner(s): Mr. Sheik Abdul Rahim
For Respondent(s): Mr.B.Kannan, CGSC, for R.1.
Mr.L.Baskaran, GA (Crl.Side) for R.2 and
R.3
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-
“directing the 1st respondent to process and issue passport to the
petitioner in respect of Passport Application File No. MA2075867492825
within a time frame by considering the petitioners explanation dated
05.01.2026.”
2. The petitioner had filed an application on 01.11.2025 for the issuance
of a passport. Subsequently, pursuant to an adverse police verification report,
the 1st respondent issued a show cause notice dated 22.11.2025, calling upon
the petitioner to submit his explanation regarding the adverse report. On
05.01.2026, the petitioner submitted a detailed explanation along with relevant
documents, including a certified copy of the bail order. As there was no
progress after the submission of the explanation, the petitioner has approached
this Court seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to process his
application.
__________
Page2 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 01:44:42 pm )
3. The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of respondents
2 and 3 would submit that a case in C.C. No. 3024 of 2025 is pending against
the petitioner before the XIV Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai,
and the matter is presently at the trial stage.
4. Heard the rival submissions of the counsels and this Court also perused
the records.
5. The reason for not issuing the passport is attributed to the pendency of
the criminal proceedings against the petitioner before the XIV Metropolitan
Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai. In a recent judgment of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Mahesh Kumar Agarwal Vs Union of India and another
arising out of SLP(C) No.17769 of 2025, the Hon’ble Supreme Court was
considering a similar case of passport which was not being granted on account
of the fact that the appellant therein was an accused in a case being investigated
by NIA. The learned Judges after taking into consideration the statutory
provisions and notifications relating to the issue on hand and after extracting the
Passport Act and Rules of the G.O., has observed as follows :
“8. From a conjoint reading of Sections 5, 6, 7 and 8 of
the Passports Act, a structured scheme emerges. Section 5 is
__________
Page3 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 01:44:42 pm )
the starting point. It prescribes the manner in which an
application for a passport is to be made and requires the
passport authority, subject to the other provisions of the Act,
to decide the application by issuing or refusing the passport
through a written order. Section 6 qualifies that power and
sets out, in an exhaustive manner, the grounds on which the
passport authority shall refuse to issue a passport or travel
document. Sub-section (1) deals with refusal of endorsements
for particular countries. Sub-section (2) governs refusal of
issue itself and again begins with the words “subject to the
other provisions of this Act”. It obliges the authority to refuse
issue where any of the situations in clauses (a) to (i) are
present, including the pendency of criminal proceedings
before a court in India under clause (f). Section 7 then
addresses the duration of a passport. It provides that a
passport shall continue in force for such period as may be
prescribed, but also permits the authority, for reasons to be
communicated in writing to the applicant, to issue a passport
for a shorter period in an appropriate case. Section 8 deals
with the converse situation where a passport has already been
issued for a shorter period. It permits extension of such a
passport, but expressly states that the provisions of the Act
__________
Page4 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 01:44:42 pm )
shall apply to such extension as they apply to the issue of the
passport, thereby linking an extension back to the same
statutory conditions and limitations that govern original issue
under Sections 5 and 6.
9. Sections 9, 10 and 22 reinforce and complete this
framework. Section 9 enables the Central Government, by
rules, to prescribe the conditions subject to which and the
form in which a passport shall be issued or renewed. It also
permits, with prior approval of the Central Government, the
imposition of case-specific conditions in addition to the
prescribed ones. Section 10 operates at a later stage and
deals with the life of a passport after it has been issued. It
empowers the passport authority, in defined situations, to
require production of the passport and to impound or revoke
it. One such situation, under Section 10(3)(e), is where
proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been
committed by the holder are pending before a criminal court
in India. Section 22 then confers on the Central Government
the power, where it considers it necessary or expedient in the
public interest, to exempt any person or class of persons from
__________
Page5 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 01:44:42 pm )
the operation of specified provisions of the Act or the Rules,
subject to conditions. It is in exercise of this power that GSR
570(E) was issued, creating a controlled exemption from the
bar in Section 6(2)(f) in favour of persons facing
criminal proceedings who obtain permission from the
concerned court and comply with the conditions set out in that
notification.
10. On a plain reading, GSR 570(E) does two things.
First, it recognises that persons facing criminal proceedings
are not to be treated as absolutely disentitled to a passport.
Instead, it permits such persons to obtain a passport,
notwithstanding Section 6(2)(f), where the concerned criminal
court has applied its mind and passed an order in relation to
issuance or use of the passport and where the applicant
furnishes an undertaking to appear before the court as and
when required. Secondly, it structures the exercise of that
exemption by tying the validity and use of the passport to the
terms of the court’s order. Thus, where the court specifies a
period for which the passport is to be issued, the passport
authority must honour that period. Where the court does not
__________
Page6 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 01:44:42 pm )
stipulate any period, the notification provides default rules,
including issuance for a shorter period, ordinarily one year,
in appropriate cases. What the notification does not do is to
create a new substantive bar beyond Section 6(2)(f), or to
insist that the criminal court must, in every case, grant a prior
blanket permission to “depart from India” for specified dates
as a jurisdictional precondition to the very issue or re-issue of
a passport.
11. The OM dated 10.10.2019 does not create a new
regime. It reiterates that GSR 570(E) must be “strictly
applied”, explains the procedure where criminal cases are
pending and makes it clear that a “no objection certificate” or
permission from the criminal court, read with the applicant’s
undertaking, may override an adverse police report with
reasons recorded by the Passport Officer. It also contemplates
situations where more than one court is dealing with the
matter and indicates that the orders of all such courts are to
be read together. The OM is thus an administrative
restatement of the position under Section 6(2)(f), Section 22
__________
Page7 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 01:44:42 pm )
and GSR 570(E), and cannot add to or cut down the
exemption which the notification itself grants.”
6. The learned Judges relying upon the earlier judgment of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court reported in Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu v. Central Bureau
of Investigation [2021 SCC Online 3549] drew a distinction between a case
facing trial in a Criminal Court and the person who is convicted, and pursuing
an appeal and also how this would impact the issuance of the passport. The
learned Judges after extracting the portions of the judgment has observed as
follows :
“20. It must also be noted that denial of renewal of a
passport does not operate in a vacuum. This Court has
repeatedly held in a catena of judgements6 that the right to
travel abroad and the right to hold a passport are facets of
the right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India. Any restriction on that right must be
fair, just and reasonable, and must bear a rational nexus
with a legitimate purpose.
21. The legitimate purpose behind Section 6(2)(f) and
Section 10(3)(e) is to ensure that a person facing criminal
__________
Page8 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 01:44:42 pm )
proceedings remains amenable to the jurisdiction of the
criminal court. That purpose is fully served in the present
case by the conditions imposed by the NIA Court, Ranchi,
and the Delhi High Court, which require the appellant to
seek prior permission before any foreign travel and, in the
NIA case, to re-deposit the passport immediately after
renewal. To add to these safeguards an indefinite denial of
even a renewed passport, when both criminal courts have
consciously permitted renewal, would be a disproportionate
and unreasonable restriction on the appellant’s liberty.”
7. Ultimately, the Court directed the authorities to re-issue the passport to
the appellant subject to the compliance of the procedural requirements within a
time frame. The Bench has observed that such issue of passport was subject to
the condition that the appellant would not leave India without the permission of
the Court concerned (Criminal Court) and should also deposit his passport in
that Court as and when demanded.
8. The dicta laid down in the above judgment would apply on all fours to
the case on hand. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed. The first respondent is
directed to issue the petitioner’s passport, after following due procedure, by
__________
Page9 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 01:44:42 pm )
considering his explanation dated 05.01.2026, in the light of the dicta laid down
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mahesh Kumar Agarwal v. Union of India
and Another (cited supra). The said exercise shall be completed within a period
of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is needless to
state that, for travelling abroad, the petitioner shall obtain permission from the
concerned Judicial Magistrate before whom the cases are pending. No costs.
Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
25-02-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
SHR
To
1. The Regional Passport Officer
Regional passport office,
Chennai 02
2. The superintendent of Police
Passport Verification cell,
Chennai
3. The Sub Inspector
F-4 Thousand lights police station,
Chennai
__________
Page10 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 01:44:42 pm )
P.T.ASHA J.
SHR
AND
WMP NO. 6941 OF 2026
25-02-2026
__________
Page11 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 01:44:42 pm )
