Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 32686
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Hemant Chandangoudar, J
Sugapriya – Appellant
Versus
The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Bharathi Ula Veethi, Race Course Road, Madurai – Respondent
Writ Petition
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.R.Vignesh
For the Respondents:Mr.I.Sekar Central Government Standing Counsel, Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi Government Advocate (crl.side)
Mere FIR registration does not justify passport refusal; pending court proceedings required under Section 6 of Passports Act, 1967.
Headnote:The Passports Act, 1967, under Section 6, empowers the Passport Authority to refuse issuance or renewal of a passport only in specifically enumerated circumstances, including where criminal proceedings are pending before a criminal court. The petitioner challenged a show cause notice issued due to an adverse police report following FIR registration. The court found that mere FIR registration does not constitute pending criminal proceedings as required under the Act. The key issue was whether FIR registration alone justifies withholding passport renewal. The court reasoned that statutory grounds under Section 6 require proceedings before a competent court, not mere police investigation. The writ petition was allowed, directing the passport authority to process and issue the passport within four weeks, subject to other eligibility criteria.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenges show cause notice due to firs. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. fir alone insufficient for passport refusal under section 6. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. directs passport issuance within four weeks. (Para 8 , 9) |
O R D E R
The petitioner is before this Court challenging the show cause notice dated 20.03.2026 issued by the first respondent.
2. By the said notice, the petitioner has been called upon to appear in person and submit relevant documents before the Enquiry Officer at the Passport Office in connection with an adverse report received from the respondent Police.
3. Mr. M. Vaikkam Karunanithi, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents 2 and 3, on instructions, submitted that a criminal case has been registered against the petitioner in Crime Nos.700 of 2024 and 344 of 2025.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.
5. The refusal to issue or renew a passport is governed by the provisions of the Passports Act, 1967. Under Section 6 of the Act, the Passport Authority is empowered to refuse issuance or renewal of a passport only in the circumstances specifically enumerated therein. One such ground is where proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant are pending before a criminal court in India.
6. In the present case, the only reason cited by the respondents is the registration of an FIR against the petitioner. However, mere registration of an FIR does not fall within the grounds contemplated under Section 6 of the Act. The statutory bar arises only when criminal proceedings are pending before a competent criminal court.
7. Therefore, the action of the first respondent in withholding the petitioner’s application solely on the basis of the registration of an FIR is not in consonance with the provisions of the Passports Act, 1967.
8. In view of the above, this Court finds merit in the petitioner’s contention.
9. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the first respondent is directed to process the petitioner’s application for issuance of a fresh passport bearing File No. MD1066494917326 dated 04.03.2026 and issue the passport, subject to the petitioner satisfying all other eligibility criteria prescribed under law.
12. The above exercise shall be completed within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
13. There shall be no order as to costs.
