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) 30021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Murali Purushothaman, J
Indrajith – Appellant
Versus
Regional Passport Officer – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 16524 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shajin S. Hameed
For the Respondents: S. Prasanth, Surya Binoy

The pendency of criminal proceedings does not constitute an absolute bar to the issuance of a Police Clearance Certificate, provided the jurisdictional court has granted permission or expressed no objection to the applicant's travel.

Headnote:The petitioner filed a writ petition aggrieved by the refusal of the passport authorities to issue a Police Clearance Certificate (PCC) due to the pendency of a criminal case against him. The petitioner demonstrated that the jurisdictional criminal court had already granted him exemption from personal appearance and explicitly recorded no objection to the issuance of a PCC for employment purposes. The primary issue was whether the pendency of a criminal case serves as an absolute bar to the issuance of a PCC. The court found that per established judicial precedents, the pendency of criminal proceedings does not preclude an individual from traveling or obtaining necessary clearances, provided the court before which the case is pending grants permission or has no objection. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondent to issue a customised PCC reflecting the status of the pending criminal case within two weeks.

Table of Content
1. factual background regarding the denial of a police clearance certificate due to pending criminal cases. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. judicial authority to mandate issuance of customised clearances despite pending criminal proceedings. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)

JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who holds an Indian passport and wishes to go abroad for employment purpose, is aggrieved by the non-issuance of a Police Clearance Certificate by the 1st respondent.

2. The petitioner states that he is an accused in S.C No.1438 of 2025 on the files of the Additional Sessions Court, Kottarakkara. The said court, by Ext.P3, granted exemption to appear before the court subject to condition. By Ext.P4 order, the said court has also observed that the court has no objection in the police authorities issuing a Police Clearance Certificate to the petitioner to obtain a visa for employment. Pursuant to the above, the petitioner submitted an application for Police Clearance Certificate before the 1st respondent evidenced by Ext.P5 receipt. By Ext.P6 communication, the petitioner was required to produce an order from this Court for further processing the application for Police Clearance Certificate.

3. A statement has been filed by the learned Central Government Counsel on behalf of the 1st respondent. Paragraph Nos.3 and 4 read as follows:-

“3. It is respectfully submitted that the police authorities furnished an adverse police verification report stating that the petitioner is an accused in Crime No.363/2025 of Puthoor Police Station and that the criminal case arising therefromis pending before the competent Sessions Court as C.P. No.32/2025. The offences alleged against the petitioner are serious in nature and the criminal proceedings are admittedly pending consideration before the jurisdictional criminal court.

4. It is submitted that Police Clearance Certificates are issued only upon receipt of clear and favourable police verification reports from the concerned police authorities. In cases where adverse police verification reports are received on account of pendency of criminal cases, Police Clearance Certificates cannot ordinarily be issued by the Passport Authorities in view of the provisions contained in the Passport Manual and the procedure governing issuance of PCC.”

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.S.Prasanth, the learned Central Government Counsel for the 1st respondent.

5. The learned Central Government Counsel submitted that since the petitioner is involved in a criminal case, only a customised Police Clearance Certificate can be issued, and that too, only on orders from this Court.

6. This Court in Siju v. Regional Passport Officer [2021 KHC 1002] has held that even if there is a criminal case pending, one is entitled to travel with the permission of the court before which the case is pending.

7. The jurisdictional criminal court by Ext.P3, has exempted the petitioner from personal appearance before that court. The petitioner states that no cases other than those mentioned in paragraph No.3 of the statement of the Central Government Counsel are pending against him.

In the said circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to issue a customised Police Clearance Certificate to the petitioner stating that there is criminal case pending against the petitioner. This shall be done within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

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