Sakthi Kandasamy, v. The Regional Passport Officer,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 28.07.2025 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN W.P.(Crl).No.417 of 2025 Sakthi Kandasamy
...Petitioner
Vs.
The Regional Passport Officer, Chennai Regional Passport Office, No.2 & 3, 4th Floor, Old No.785, New No.158, Rayala Towers, Anna Salai, Chennai.
..Respondent Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent to renew the petitioners passport bearing No.G6879459 for a normal period of ten years from 03.04.2025 as per Rule 12(1) of the Passport Rules, 1980, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court, based on the representations dated 23.07.2024 & 18.01.2025.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Ramachandran ******
ORDER
1/5
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking directions to the respondent to renew the petitioner's passport bearing No.G6879459 for a normal period of ten years from 03.04.2025 as per Rule 12(1) of the Passport Rules, 1980, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court, based on the representations dated 23.07.2024 and 18.01.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner had faced trial in C.C.No.4 of 2015, which was ended in conviction and the petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years with fine of Rs.25,000/- for both Section 7 and Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and ordered the sentence to run concurrently. As against the same, the petitioner has filed an appeal in Crl.A.No.707 of 2018, which is pending before this Court.
The petitioner disclosing all the facts, submitted on-line application to renew his passport on 09.05.2024, which is pending at the stage of police verification. Thereafter the petitioner sent reminders, but the same have not been considered by the respondent. Hence the Writ Petition.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.
Since no adverse order is being passed, notice to the respondent is dispensed with.
It is seen from the records that the petitioner is a convict for the offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, in C.C.No.4 of 2015 vide judgment dated 30.10.2018. Against his conviction, he also preferred an appeal in the year 2018 in Crl.A.No.707 of 2018, which is pending before this Court. Now the petitioner has filed the present petition seeking directions to the respondent to renew the passport, which was expired in the year 2018.
3/5
The petitioner was convicted for the offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, which is grievous in nature and he also preferred an appeal in the year 2018 itself. Now, without prosecuting the said appeal, the petitioner has filed the present petition invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking directions to the respondent to return the passport for the purpose of renewal. This Court is of the view that unless, the said appeal is disposed of in favour of the petitioner, he is not entitled to the relief sought for in the present writ petition. Under such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant any relief to the petitioner. Accordingly the Writ Petition stands dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the respondent, after disposal of the said Criminal Appeal.
28.07.2025 cgi Speaking /Non-speaking order 4/5
P.VELMURUGAN, J.
cgi W.P.(Crl.)No.417 of 2025 28.07.2025 5/5