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)(Mad) 35270

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Hemant Chandangoudar, J
Sathish – Appellant
Versus
The Regional Passport Officer, The Regional Passport Office, Madurai – Respondent
W.P.(MD)No.10623 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.T.Antony Arulraj
For the Respondents: Mr.R.Ganeshkumar, Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi

Mere FIR registration does not justify passport refusal under Section 6 of Passports Act; requires pending court proceedings.

Headnote:The petitioner applied for passport renewal under the Passports Act, 1967, which was withheld due to a pending FIR (Crime No.102 of 2025) under Section 30392) of BNS and Section 4(1)(1A) r/w 21(5) of MMDR Act. The court found that mere FIR registration does not constitute pending proceedings before a competent criminal court as required under Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967. The issue framed was whether passport renewal can be refused solely on FIR registration. The ratio decidendi is that Section 6 permits refusal only for specific grounds, including pending court proceedings; FIR alone does not trigger the bar (paras 5-7). Writ petition allowed; respondent directed to process and issue passport within four weeks, subject to eligibility.

Table of Content
1. passport renewal delayed due to fir. (Para 2 , 3)
2. fir alone not ground for passport refusal under section 6. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
3. mandamus issued to process passport within four weeks. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)

ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to renew his passport based on his application in File No. 26-1-52671019 dated 12.02.2026.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that, though he has submitted an application for renewal of his passport, the same has not been processed by the first respondent. According to the petitioner, the application has been kept pending on the ground that criminal cases have been registered against him.

3. Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), appearing for the respondent No.2, on instructions, submitted that a criminal case has been registered against the petitioner in Crime No.102 of 2025 for the offence punishable under Section 30392) of BNS, and Section 4(1)(1A) r/w 21(5) of MMDR Act .

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 on the grounds 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 competent criminal court in India.

6. In the present case, the only reason cited by the respondents is the registration of FIR against the petitioner. However, mere registration of 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 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 renewal of passport in File No. 26-1-52671019 dated 12.02.2026 and issue the passport, subject to the petitioner satisfying all other eligibility criteria prescribed under law.

10. The above exercise shall be completed within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

11. There shall be no orders as to costs.

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