Kaleel Rahman Ajmal Khan v. The Regional Passort Officer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 20-08-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH AND WMP NO. 35001 OF 2025
1. Kaleel Rahman Ajmal Khan S/o.Amal Khan, No.30/20, Deravenkataswami Street, Triplicane, Chennai-600 005.
Petitioner(s) Vs
1. The Regional Passport Officer Regional Passport Office, Rayala Towers 2 And 3 Iv Floor, New No.158, Anna Salai, Chennai-2.
2.The Inspector Of Police Cyber Crime Police Station, CCB (ccd-1 District) Office Of The Commissioner Of Police, Veppery, Chennai-600 007.
Respondent(s) PRAYER Writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issue of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating the impugned communication / letter in Letter Ref. No.SCN/ 104958 9767/25 dated 15.07.2025 of the 1st respondent and quash the same as illegal and contrary to the judgement of this Honourable court in The Regional Passport Officer, Chennai Vs. Samsudeen
Mohamed Salih and another in W.A. No.902 of 2023 and consequently direct the 1st respondent to re-issue passport to the petitioner vide File MA 1075269857125 dated 02.07.2025 by considering the petitioners representation dated 29.07.2025 within time frame stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner(s): Mr. I.Abdul Basith For Respondent(s):
M/s.R.Sugumar, CGSC For R1
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned communication dated 15.07.2205 issued by the 1st respondent and for a consequential direction to the 1st respondent to renew the passport of the petitioner.
2.
The learned Government Advocate submitted that the investigation is pending in Crime No.259 of 2024. 3.
The impugned communication 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.
4.
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. 5.
In view of the above, the impugned summons issued by the 1st respondent dated 15.07.2025 is hereby quashed and there shall be a direction to the 1st respondent to reissue / renew the passport in favour of the petitioner for the regular period, 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.
6.
This writ petition is allowed with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 20-08-2025 rka Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes
To 1.The Regional passport Officer Regional Passport Office, Rayala Towers 2 And 3, IV Floor, New No.158, Anna Salai,C Hennai-2.
2.The Inspector Of Police Cyber Crime Police Station, CCB (CCD-1 District) Office Of The Commissioner Of Police, Vepery, Chennai-600 007.
N.ANAND VENKATESH J.
rka WP No. 31273 of WMP NO. 35001 OF 20-08-2025