SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 2367

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BASANT BALAJI, J
JISHAD – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 1550 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.SALISH ARAVINDAKSHAN
For the Respondents: SMT. O. H. SHALINA, DSGI

A pending criminal case does not inherently disqualify a person from obtaining a Police Clearance Certificate if permitted by a court for travel.

Headnote:This judgment deals with the issuance of a Police Clearance Certificate under the Passports Act, 1967, following the decline due to a pending criminal case. The court determined that a pending case does not disqualify an individual from obtaining travel facilities, especially when a court permits travel for employment. The directive given mandates the issuance of a clearance certificate indicating the pending case but highlighting the court's permission for travel.

Result: Direction to issue Police Clearance Certificate.

Table of Content
1. criteria for issuance of police clearance certificate (Para 1 , 5 , 7)
2. arguments on the necessity of a clean police report (Para 2 , 3)
3. observations regarding criminal case impact on travel (Para 4)
4. final directive for issuance of police clearance certificate (Para 8)

JUDGMENT

(Dated this the 15th day of January, 2026)

The petitioner holds an Indian Passport bearing No.T0899635, sought a Police Clearance Certificate from the 4th respondent. Issue of Police Clearance Certificate is a miscellaneous service provided by the authorities under the Passports Act , 1967. The Police Clearance Certificate sought by the petitioner was declined by the 4th respondent on the ground that a case is pending against him in a criminal court. The case of the petitioner is that he has been permitted in the said case to go abroad to pursue his employment as per Ext.P3 order of the Judicial First Class Magistrate and therefore, he ought to have been issued the Police Clearance Certificate for employment purpose.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the respondents.

3. The learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, relying on Chapter 14 of the Passport Manual 2010, pointed out that a Police Clearance Certificate is insisted for going abroad to satisfy that there is no police case against the person concerned and that therefore, the same can be issued by the respondent only on receipt of a clear police report. According to the learned DSGI, since there is admittedly a criminal case pending against the petitioner, Police Clearance Certificate cannot be issued to the petitioner. Relying upon Appendix-32 of the Passport Manual, it was contended that Police Clearance Certificates are issued by the authorities under the Passports Act in the specimen contained in Appendix-32 and the said Certificate cannot be issued in the said specimen, when there is a criminal case against the person concerned.

4. The specimen Police Clearance Certificate contained in Appendix-32 of the Passport Manual reads thus:

Appendix-32 (Ref. para 2.1 Chapter-14)

Specimen PCC format for Indian Passport holders (to be issued on official letter head)

“There is no adverse information against Mr./Mrs./Miss …............, holder of Indian Passport No. …........... issued at …....... on …..... which would render him/her ineligible for the grant of travel facilities including visa for …...... (name of the country).

Rubber Stamp of office of issue. Signature of Passport Authority.

5. It is evident from the specimen referred to above that a person is entitled to Police Clearance Certificate, only if there is no adverse information which would render him/her ineligible for grant of travel facilities. There is no dispute to the fact that the pendency of a criminal case is not a reason which would render a person ineligible for grant of travel facilities in India. The requirement of law is that if there is a criminal case pending, one is entitled to travel only with the permission of the court before which the case is pending. As far as the present case is concerned, the petitioner is permitted by the criminal court to go abroad to pursue his employment. Therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner is ineligible for travel facilities. At the same time, it cannot be said that there is no adverse information against the petitioner.

6. It is relevant to note that this Court had in Jayan v.

Union of India [2018 (4) KLT 1077] observed that mere registration of a crime does not invoke either S.6 or S.10 of the Passports Act .

7. In view of the above, notwithstanding the crime registered against the petitioner as Crime No.1324/2019, there is no bar in issuing a Passport to the petitioner. This is on account of two reasons (i) No “criminal proceedings” are pending in any court as contemplated under law, and (ii) even if it is deemed to be pending, since the petitioner has obtained permission from the Magistrate's Court, he can be issued with a valid

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top