IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 09.01.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA Rafeek ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Chennai Royala Towers, No. 2 and 3, IV Floor, Old No. 785,, New No. 158, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

2.State rep by Inspector of Police Sangarapuram Police Station, Kallakurichi - 606 401.

...Respondents Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the 1^st respondent to issue a passport to the petitioner based on his application dated 01.04.2025 vide application ref.No.25-1049910194.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Mohammed Aseef For Respondents : Mr..L.Baskar, Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side)

for R.2.

: Mr.V.Muthupandi, Standing Counsel for R.1

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed for the following relief:-

“directing the 1st respondent to issue a passport to the petitioner based on his application dated 01.04.2025 vide application ref.No.25-

1049910194..”

2. It is the case of the petitioner that he had applied for issuance of a passport before the 1st respondent on 01.04.2025. Though the enquiry and police verification have already been completed, the 1st respondent kept the application pending on the ground of pendency of an FIR in Crime No.394 of 2015, registered on the file of Sankarapuram Police Station, for the alleged offences under Sections 420, 471 and 468 of the IPC read with Section 12 of the Passports Act, 1967. The petitioner’s contention is that he is in no way connected with the alleged offences and the said FIR has been pending since 2015 without filing any charge sheet. However, despite the petitioner’s explanation, the 1^st respondent has not taken any action on his application and has kept it pending without any justifiable reason, Hence, the Writ Petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the records.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is allowed. The 1^st respondent is directed to consider the petitioner’s representation seeking issuance of passport and pass appropriate orders, if all other parameters are found to be in order, in accordance with law, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The 1st respondent shall bear in mind the dicta laid down in a recent judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported as Mahesh Kumar Agarwal Vs Union of India [SLP(Civil) No.17769 of 2025. It is needless to state that as and when the petitioner intends to travel abroad, he shall obtain the necessary permission from the concerned Judicial Magistrate, if any case is pending against him. No costs.

09.01.2026 (shr)

Index : Yes/No Speaking Order: Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No To

1.The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Chennai Royala Towers, No. 2 and 3, IV Floor, Old No. 785,, New No. 158, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

2.State rep by Inspector of Police Sangarapuram Police Station, Kallakurichi - 606 401.

P.T. ASHA . J. , (shr)

09 .01.2026