Sundararajan v. The Passport Officer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22-07-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH AND WMP NO. 29449 OF 2025 Sundararajan S/o.Duraisamy, 175-Z/10, Pudhu Colony, 3rd Kurukku Street, Duraimangalam, Perambalur District.
Petitioner(s) Vs
1. The Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Tiruchirappalli, New Municipal Complex, Thillai Nagar 7th Cross Tiruchirappalli.
2.The Superintendent of Police, Perambalur District.
3.The State rep. By, Inspector of Police, Perambalur Police Station, Perambalur District.
Respondent(s) PRAYER Writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of Certiorari to call for the entire records relating to the summon issued by the 1st respondent in File No.TR5075068375925 dated 04.06.2025 and quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent to reissue the passport
within a time frame fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner Mr.R.Gokulakrishnan For Respondent(s):
Mr.Subbu Ranga Bharathi Central Government Counsel for R1 Mr.V.Meganathan, Government Advocate [Crl Side] For R2 And 3
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned summons issued by the 1st respondent dated 04.06.2025 and for a consequential direction to the 1st respondent to re-issue /renew the passport based on the application submitted by the petitioner on 19.05.2025.
2.
Heard Mr.R.Gokulakrishnan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.V.Meganathan, learned Government Advocate [Crl. Side] for respondents 2 and 3.
3.
The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents 2 and 3 based on instructions submitted that FIR is pending against the petitioner in Crime No.213 of 2024 and the same is at the stage of investigation.
4.
The impugned summons has been issued by the 1st respondent based on the report received from the police to the effect that there is a criminal case pending against the petitioner. 5.
In the considered view of this Court, the mere pendency of an FIR against the petitioner cannot be a ground to refuse reissuance / renewal of the passport in favour of the petitioner. The law on this issue is now too well settled. Useful reference can be made to the judgement of the Division Bench of this Court in WA No.902 of 2023 wherein the Division Bench has held that insofar as the re-issuance of passport is concerned, it is not necessary for the concerned person to get the permission from the Court. Only when it comes to travelling abroad, the concerned person must seek for permission from the Court where the criminal case is pending. 6.
In view of the above, the impugned summons issued by the 1st respondent dated 04.06.2025 is hereby quashed and there shall be a direction to the 1st respondent to reissue / renew the passport in favour of the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if the petitioner has
satisfied all the other requirements.
7.
This writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
22-07-2025 rka Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes
To 1.The Passport Officer Regional Passport Office, Tiruchirappalli, New Municipal Complex, Thillai Nagar, 7th Cross Tiruchirappalli.
2.The Superintendent Of Police Perambalur District.
3.The State Rep. By Inspector of Police, Perambalur Police Station, Perambalur District.
N.ANAND VENKATESH J.
rka WP No. 26156 of And WMP NO.
29449 OF 2025 22-07-2025