Advocates:
['Sandeep Kumar Ambalavanan', '', 'Kaveen', 'Salaivarun', 'M/S PRASAD VIJAYAKUMAR']

W.P.No.15018 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 04.07.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

W.P.No.15018 of 2022

and W.M.P.No.14237 of 2022

Meera Arun

.. Petitioner

Vs.

The Regional Passport Officer,

Royala Towers No.2 & 3,

IV Floor, Old No.785, New No.158,

Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.

.. Respondent

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the

records of the respondent vide Letter Reference No.SCN/312216637/22

dated 23.02.2022, quash the same as illegal and unconstitutional and

consequently direct the respondent to renew the passport of the petitioner

vide Passport No.Z1947466 for period of 10 years from the date of issuance.

For Petitioner

: Mr.Salaivarun

For Respondent

: Mr.Prasad Vijayakumar

Senior Panel Counsel

1/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.15018 of 2022

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated

23.02.2022 passed by the respondent calling upon the petitioner to submit

her explanation and present status with regard to the following cases pending

against her:

(a) Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO), Ministry of Corporate

Affairs letter dated 09.04.2021 regarding request of passport particulars in

connection with the investigation into the affairs of M/s.Vasan Health Care

Private Limited under Section 212 of the Companies Act, 2013.

(b) Kotak Mahindra Bank, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008 regarding a

criminal complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881,

pending against the petitioner before the Fast Track Court – IV, Metropolitan

Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, which is registered and numbered as

C.C.No.5351 of 2016.

2. Insofar as the first case referred to supra namely, the Serious Fraud

Investigation Office case is concerned, the learned senior panel counsel

appearing for the respondent, on instructions, would submit that no charge

sheet has been filed and no cognizance has been taken by any Court vide

2/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.15018 of 2022

letter dated 25.05.2022 issued by SFIO. However, learned senior panel

counsel would submit that insofar as the second criminal case pending

against the petitioner is concerned, namely the complaint in C.C.No.5351 of

2016 pending on the file of Fast Track Court – IV, Metropolitan Magistrate,

Saidapet, Chennai, the said complaint is still pending and it relates to

dishonor of cheques issued by the petitioner for which, prosecution has been

lodged under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relies upon a

decision of the Division Bench of this Court dated 17.09.2019 in

WA.Nos.994 & 3192 of 2019 in the case of 'Ashok Muthana Vs. Regional

Passport Officer Chennai' and would submit that in the said decision also,

criminal complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,

were pending against the applicants, who had sought for passport but

Division Bench held that for seeking a renewal of passport, there is no

necessity for the applicant to approach the Criminal Court in case of Section

138 complaints.

4. This Court is not expressing any opinion as regard the merits of the

contention of the petitioner, as the learned senior panel counsel for the

3/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.15018 of 2022

respondent would submit that the said decision is not applicable to the facts

of the instant case.

5. No prejudice will be caused to the petitioner if he is directed to

submit an explanation to the impugned communication received from the

respondent, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court by giving reasons

as to why the requirement for getting permission from the concerned

Criminal Court with regard to the pendency of the criminal compl