Madras High CourtWP(MD)/7428/2026disposed of

S.K.P.Murugan v. The Regional Passport Officer

2026-03-18Honourable Mr Justice D.Bharatha Chakravarthy5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.03.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY S.K.P.Murugan ... Petitioner -vsThe Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Bharathi Ula Veethi, Race Course Road, Madurai.

... Respondent PRAYER:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 16.09.2025 and re-issue the passport for the normal period of 10 years as per Section 12(1) of the Passports Act, 1967, by correcting validity period and the date of birth as 16.03.1965 in respect of Passport Application No.MD1077275672725, dated 27.12.2024 and pass appropriate orders within a time stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Niresh Kumar For Respondent : Mr.Sathis Kumar Standing Counsel

ORDER

The writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 16.09.2025 and reissue the passport for the normal period of ten years, in accordance with Section 12(1) of the Passports Act, 1967.

2. When the matter came up for hearing, Mr.Sathis Kumar, learned Standing Counsel, taking notice on behalf of the respondent, submitted that C.C.No.185 of 2024 is pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Ottapidaram. It was further submitted that even if the passport is re-issued, it should be granted only on a year-to-year basis in view of the Government of India instructions.

3. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Division Bench of this Court has considered a similar issue in Aynul Yakheen Ibrahim v. The Regional Passport Officer, Madurai [W.A.(MD)No.303 of 2025, dated 25.03.2025], and, considering the difficulties faced by persons like the petitioner who travel abroad for work, it directed renewal for five years instead of year-to-year.

4. In view of the above, the mere pendency of a criminal case cannot be a fetter. If there is no other legal impediment, the passport may be re-issued to the petitioner.

5. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to dispose of this writ petition on the following terms:

(i) The respondent shall consider the petitioner's representation dated 16.09.2025 and Application No.MD1077275672725, dated 27.12.2024, and reissue the passport with a validity of five years. (ii) When the petitioner intends to travel abroad, he shall obtain permission from the Trial Court, and thereafter, may travel in accordance with law.

6. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner also brought to the notice of this Court that the date of birth of the petitioner is incorrectly entered in the passport, whereas the correct date has been mentioned in the application.

7. The learned Standing Counsel submitted that the authorities are required to consider the documents submitted at the time of the previous passport application. The issue of correcting the date of birth may also be considered while re-issuing the passport, and a decision shall be made in accordance with law.

8. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. 18.03.2026 smn2 To:- The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Bharathi Ula Veethi, Race Course Road, Madurai.

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY , J.

smn2 18.03.2026