Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 15012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.T. ASHA, J
S.Sathyamoorty – Appellant
Versus
The Regional Passport officer – Respondent
Writ Petition | WP.5139/2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.P. Rajendran
For the Respondents:M/s. S. Shalini, CGSC for R1, Mr.L.Baskaran Govt.advocate (crl.side) for R2
The Court ruled that the presence of an FIR without a filed charge sheet does not preclude the issuance of a passport.
Headnote:This judgment addresses a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking a mandamus for the issuance of a passport. The petitioner contends that an adverse police verification report is based solely on an FIR from 2020, with no charges filed. The Court directs the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation within a stipulated time, emphasizing the lack of ongoing criminal proceedings. Ultimately, the petition is allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. evaluation of passport application amidst ongoing fir. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. court's directive to consider the representation. (Para 4) |
| 3. final ruling allowing the writ petition. (Para 5) |
ORDER
The petitioner has filed the above writ petition seeking a mandamus to the respondents to consider his representation dated 14.11.2025 for renewal of his passport vide Application No.MAH065929561625.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that he applied for issuance of passport on 07.11.2025 before the office of the first respondent. On receipt of the said application, the first respondent, vide letter dated 22.11.2025, informed the petitioner that an adverse police verification report had been received from Annamalai Nagar Police Station in respect of the petitioner in Crime No.1102 of 2020.
3. The petitioner would submit that the FIR has been registered against him for allegations that he illegally transported two bags of river sand. He would further submit that even though FIR was registered on 01.09.2020, no further investigation was carried out. He would also submit that, as on date, no charge sheet has been filed and no summons has been served on him. The petitioner thereafter submitted a representation to the first respondent seeking issuance of his passport. However, no action has been taken on the said representation to date. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.
4. Heard the submissions of the counsels and this Court also perused the records.
5. In view of the above, the first respondent is directed to take note of the fact that only an FIR was registered in the year 2020, but no charge sheet has been filed till date, and 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 four 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.
Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. No costs.
