W.P(MD)No.17735 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P(MD)No.17735 of 2026 A.M.B.Mahan ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Bharathi Ula Road, Race Course Road, Madurai – 2. 2.The Inspector of Police, South Thamaraikulam Police Station, Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to issue passport to the petitioner on the basis of his application dated 28.07.2025 pending in file No.MD4065401945925 before the first respondent within a time frame. 1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.17735 of 2026 For Petitioner : Mr.M.Deepan Chakkaravarthy For Respondents : Mr.V.B.Sundareshwar (R1) Central Government Standing Counsel : Mr.R.Mohamed Riyaz (R2) Government Advocate (Criminal Side) ORDER This Writ Petition has been filed seeking the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to issue passport to the petitioner on the basis of his application dated 28.07.2025 pending before the first respondent within a time frame. 2.By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

3..The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had applied for the issuance of a fresh passport. However, the application has not been processed on the ground that criminal cases are pending against the petitioner. 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.17735 of 2026 4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the second respondent submitted that criminal case is pending against the petitioner and that the same is under investigation. 5.Mere pendency of criminal proceedings cannot be a bar to the consideration of the petitioner's application for the issuance of a passport by the first respondent. 6.The issue involved in the present case is no longer res integra. An identical issue has already been decided by the Hon'ble First Bench of this Court in W.A.No.902 of 2023 [The Regional Passport Officer, Chennai v. Samsudeen Mohamed Salih and another], by judgment dated 02.06.2023, the relevant portion of which is extracted hereunder: ''5. A Division Bench of the Bombay High Court, in the case of Abbas Hatimbhai Kagalwala v. State of Maharashtra and another, 2022 SCC OnLine Bom 1992, to which one of us (S.V.Gangapurwala, CJ.) was a party, has followed the judgment of the Apex Court in 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.17735 of 2026 the case of Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu, supra and directed the respondent therein to process the application of the petitioner for renewal of the passport.

6. The contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the first respondent cannot travel abroad without the permission of the Court where the criminal case is pending, would not be an impediment for the passport authority to consider the application for renewal of the passport. No doubt, if the first respondent has to travel abroad and the criminal case is pending, then unless the Magistrate or the Sessions Court where the criminal case is pending permits the first respondent to travel abroad, he cannot travel abroad. 7. In the light of the above, we pass the following order: (i) The writ appellant shall process the application of the first respondent for renewal of passport without insisting for permission of the Court, where a criminal case is pending against the first respondent. If the first respondent is travelling abroad, then the first respondent would be required to seek permission from the Court where the criminal case is pending. (ii) Decision shall be taken as above, within one 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.17735 of 2026 month.''

7.Following the aforesaid decision, the first respondent is directed to process the petitioner's passport application without insisting upon an order or permission from the jurisdictional criminal Court where the criminal case is pending against the petitioner, and to take an appropriate decision on the application, on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, if the petitioner intends to travel abroad, it is open to the petitioner to obtain the necessary permission from the jurisdictional criminal Court before undertaking such travel. 8.With the above observations and directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 03.07.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.17735 of 2026 ps To 1.The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Bharathi Ula Road, Race Course Road, Madurai – 2. 2.The Inspector of Police, South Thamaraikulam Police Station, Kanyakumari District. 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.17735 of 2026 M.DHANDAPANI, J. ps W.P(MD)No.17735 of 2026 03.07.2026 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P(MD)No.17735 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P(MD)No.17735 of 2026 A.M.B.Mahan ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Bharathi Ula Road, Race Course Road, Madurai – 2. 2.The Inspector of Police, South Thamaraikulam Police Station, Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to issue passport to the petitioner on the basis of his application dated 28.07.2025 pending in file No.MD4065401945925 before the first respondent within a time frame. 1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.17735 of 2026 For Petitioner : Mr.M.Deepan Chakkaravarthy For Respondents : Mr.V.B.Sundareshwar (R1) Central Government Standing Counsel : Mr.R.Mohamed Riyaz (R2) Government Advocate (Criminal Side) ORDER This Writ Petition has been filed seeking the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to issue passport to the petitioner on the basis of his application dated 28.07.2025 pending before the first respondent within a time frame. 2.By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

3..The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had applied for the issuance of a fresh passport. However, the application has not been processed on the ground that criminal cases are pending against the petitioner. 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.17735 of 2026 4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the second respondent submitted that criminal case is pending against the petitioner and that the same is under investigation. 5.Mere pendency of criminal proceedings cannot be a bar to the consideration of the petitioner's application for the issuance of a passport by the first respondent. 6.The issue involved in the present case is no longer res integra. An identical issue has already been decided by the Hon'ble First Bench of this Court in W.A.No.902 of 2023 [The Regional Passport Officer, Chennai v. Samsudeen Mohamed Salih and another], by judgment dated 02.06.2023, the relevant portion of which is extracted hereunder: ''5. A Division Bench of the Bombay High Court, in the case of Abbas Hatimbhai Kagalwala v. State of Maharashtra and another, 2022 SCC OnLine Bom 1992, to which one of us (S.V.Gangapurwala, CJ.) was a party, has followed the judgment of the Apex Court in 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.17735 of 2026 the case of Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu, supra and directed the respondent therein to process the application of the petitioner for renewal of the passport.

6. The contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the first respondent cannot travel abroad without the permission of the Court where the criminal case is pending, would not be an impediment for the passport authority to consider the application for renewal of the passport. No doubt, if the first respondent has to travel abroad and the criminal case is pending, then unless the Magistrate or the Sessions Court where the criminal case is pending permits the first respondent to travel abroad, he cannot travel abroad. 7. In the light of the above, we pass the following order: (i) The writ appellant shall process the application of the first respondent for renewal of passport without insisting for permission of the Court, where a criminal case is pending against the first respondent. If the first respondent is travelling abroad, then the first respondent would be required to seek permission from the Court where the criminal case is pending. (ii) Decision shall be taken as above, within one 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.17735 of 2026 month.''

7.Following the aforesaid decision, the first respondent is directed to process the petitioner's passport application without insisting upon an order or permission from the jurisdictional criminal Court where the criminal case is pending against the petitioner, and to take an appropriate decision on the application, on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, if the petitioner intends to travel abroad, it is open to the petitioner to obtain the necessary permission from the jurisdictional criminal Court before undertaking such travel. 8.With the above observations and directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 03.07.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.17735 of 2026 ps To 1.The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Bharathi Ula Road, Race Course Road, Madurai – 2. 2.The Inspector of Police, South Thamaraikulam Police Station, Kanyakumari District. 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.17735 of 2026 M.DHANDAPANI, J. ps W.P(MD)No.17735 of 2026 03.07.2026 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis