Balavinder Singh v. The State Rep.By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Balavinder Singh, S/o.Huzur Singh, Plot No.905, Silent Valley Hills, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad-500 033.

..Petitioner(s) Vs The state rep.by, The Inspector of Police, CBI/EOB/Chennai.

..Respondent(s) PRAYER:This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C./528 of BNSS, seeking to call for the records and set aside the conditions imposed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai in Crl.MP.No.2505 of 2026 dated 18.03.2026.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.K.P. Anantha Krishna For Respondent(s):

Mr.B.Mohan, Special Public Prosecutor for CBI Cases

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking to call for the records and to set aside the conditions imposed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan

Magistrate, Chennai in Crl MP No.2505 of 2026 dated 18.03.2026 while ordering re-issuance of the passport to the petitioner herein.

2. It appears that the petitioner, being one of the accused, is facing trial in the following cases, viz., Sl.No.

Arrayed as Case No.

Court 1.

A3 C.C.No.5231 of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai 2.

A6 S.C.No.264 of I Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad 3.

A2 C.C.No.5574 of XXI Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-cumSpecial JMFC for trial of CBI cases, Hyderabad

3. The petitioner had filed an application in Crl.M.P.No.2505 of 2026 praying for an order to renew his passport. The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, vide order dated 18.03.2026, allowed the petition with certain conditions and the operative portion of the said order reads thus: "In the result, this petition is allowed and the petitioner/A3 is permitted to get the passport re-issued with the following conditions:

(i)The passport shall be re-issued to the petitioner

with a validity of four years.

(ii) The petitioner shall not travel abroad without the prior permission of this Court.

(iii)The petitioner shall produce the original passport, after its re -issue/renewed before this Court along with a copy for perusal/verification.''

Seeking to modify the above conditions, the present petition has been filed.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner, who has been facing trial in the above mentioned cases, has sought permission before the Courts at Hyderabad for renewal of his passport. The learned Sessions Judge, I Additional Sessions Court, Hyderabad, vide order dated 24.02.2026 in Crl.MP.No.423 of 2026, has directed the Regional Passport Officer, Hyderabad, to renew the passport for a period of 10 years in accordance with law. The learned Sessions Judge has further directed the petitioner to surrender his passport before the Court within a period of one week of his return to India. Likewise, the learned XXI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate/ Special Judge for trial of CBI cases, Hyderabad has also permitted the petitioner to renew his passport for a period of 10 years.

5. While so, since the petitioner is facing trial before the Additional Chief

Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, he has applied for permission to renew his passport, whereas, strangely, the learned Judge had permitted to renew the passport only for a period of four (4) years and the petitioner has also been directed to produce the original passport before the Court after its reissue/renewal. The learned counsel would submit that the petitioner undertakes to approach the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chenai, whenever he intends to travel and get permission.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the old passport has been returned by the learned Sessions Judge for renewal and it is now in the custody of the petitioner and unless the order of the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore granting validity of four (4) years is modified, the petitioner will not be able to get the renewal of his passport for a period of 10 years. Apart from that, the petitioner is ready to produce the renewed/fresh passport for verification before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore and thereafter, he also undertakes to produce the same before the Sessions Court at Hyderabad after verification by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.

6. The learned counsel would also submit that since the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, has also imposed a condition that the petitioner shall not travel abroad without the permission of the Court, the petitioner undertakes to apply for prior permission each time

whenever he intends to travel abroad. Therefore, the learned counsel would urge this Court to modify the conditions imposed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.

7. Mr.B. Mohan, the learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would vehemently oppose the present petition. However, he would submit that in the event of this Court allowing the petition, the respondent may be granted two weeks time to oppose any petition filed for permission to travel abroad.

8. Heard the learned counsel on both sides and perused the materials available on record.

9. The petitioner is one of the accused, facing trial before the Courts as mentioned above in Chennai as well as in Hyderabad. The Courts in Hyderabad, while granting permission to renew the passport, have directed the Regional Passport Officer to renew the passport for a period of 10 years, whereas, the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, has permitted renewal of the passport only for a period of four (4) years. As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in view of

the divergent orders passed by the Courts, the Regional Passport Authority may not entertain the application of the petitioner for renewal of his passport as they may not be in a position as to which order of the Court has to be complied with. In fact, the Courts at Hyderabad, viz., the Sessions Judge, Hyderabad as well as XXI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate/ Special Judge for trial of CBI cases, Hyderabad, have rightly permitted renewal of the passport for a period of ten (10) years and in line with the same, the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, ought to have taken note of the same and permitted renewal of the passport for a period of ten (10) years as well instead of restricting it to only for a period of four (4) years. Therefore, the conditions imposed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, are modified as follows:

(i) The passport shall be re-issued to the petitioner with a validity of ten (10) years;

(ii) After renewal of the passport, the petitioner shall not travel abroad without the prior permission of the concerned Court. However, the petitioner shall give due notice to the respondent two weeks before filing the petition seeking for prior permission to travel abroad and such petition shall be disposed of by the Court concerned as expeditiously as possible.

(iii) The petitioner shall produce the original passport after its re-issue/renewal before the concerned Court for its

perusal/verification and after verification, the same may be returned to the petitioner, to enable him to produce the same before the Courts at Hyderabad.

(iv) The petitioner shall also comply with the conditions imposed by the Courts at Hyderabard.

10. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.. 22-04-2026 DN Issue order copy on 24.04.2026 To

1. The Inspector of Police, CBI/EOB/Chennai.

2.The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA J.

DN 22-04-2026