Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 18
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J
NIZAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 45384 OF 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.T.K.SANDEEP, SMT.RESHMA VISWANATHAN
For the Respondents: SMT. SURYA BINOY, ADV.O.M.SHALINA
The court established that prior rejections of passport renewals can be directed for reconsideration despite existing orders, under specific statutory provisions.
Headnote:The petitioner sought a direction for processing his passport renewal application as per Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967. The petitioner had previous permissions for passport renewal but faced rejections due to lack of active visa. The Court directed consideration of the application, overriding prior rejection orders, allowing the petitioner to seek travel permission from the relevant Special Court.
Result: The application must be considered within three weeks.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. passport renewal application facts (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. application rejection arguments (Para 3) |
| 3. court's directive on reconsideration (Para 4) |
JUDGMENT
The petitioner seeks a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the application made on 21.10.2025 for renewal of his passport.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that four criminal cases are registered against the petitioner. Through Exts.P1 and P2 orders, the courts concerned had permitted the petitioner to renew the passport for a period of two years and also to travel abroad. However, through Exts.P3 and P4 orders, on the ground that no active visa to travel abroad was produced, the request of the petitioner for permission to travel abroad was rejected.
3. A statement has been filed on behalf of the DSGI, placing reliance on Section 6 (2)(f) of the Passports Act , 1967 and that the request was not allowed in view of Exts.P3 and P4 orders referred to above.
4. After hearing the learned counsel appearing on both sides and taking note of Exts.P1 and P2 orders, and also perusing the reasons stated in Exts.P3 and P4 orders, the Writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider the application for renewal of the passport of the petitioner, if the application is otherwise in order, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, notwithstanding Exts.P3 and P4 orders. Upon the renewal of the passport, the petitioner may seek permission to travel abroad from the Special Court for SC/ST (POA) Act, Mannarkkad, in S.C. No. 43 of 2018 and S.C. No. 448 of 2018, which dehors shall be considered on its merits and the reasoning in Exts.P3 and P4.
Sd/-
