Dismissed¶40

Mohammed Azarudeen v. The Union of India

Madras HC25 Jul 2025WA(MD)/2029/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

passport renewal reissuance refused criminal cases pending; Regional Passport Officer Tiruchirappalli; writ court cannot grant relief at first instance vs trial court route; Judicial Magistrate Aranthangi Pudukkottai; Section 228 Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita 2023 special vakalat; Clause 15 Letters Patent writ appeal; W.A(MD)No.2029 of 2025; W.P(MD)No.10019 of 2025; writ appeal dismissed no costs; Madurai Bench Madras High Court; G.R. Swaminathan; K. Rajasekar; Crime Nos.573 and 353 of 2020 Nagudi Police Station; Crime No.297 of 2021 Aranthangi Police Station

What did the court decide?

The Writ Appeal stands dismissed, with no order as to costs; the Division Bench declined to interfere with the learned single Judge's order dated 25.04.2025 in W.P(MD)No.10019 of 2025. ¶40

Mohammed Azarudeen Vs The Union of India — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶40

Issue for consideration

Whether the Writ Appeal seeking to set aside the learned single Judge's order dated 25.04.2025 in W.P(MD)No.10019 of 2025 should be allowed. +1 more

¶17

Court's answer

The Writ Appeal stands dismissed, with no order as to costs; the Division Bench declined to interfere with the learned single Judge's order dated 25.04.2025 in W.P(MD)No.10019 of 2025.

¶40

Ratio / Principle

By dismissing the appeal, the Court left intact the single Judge's scheme under which the appellant is to obtain relief through the Judicial Magistrate, Aranthangi, and subsequently the jurisdictional Regional Passport Officer, rather than receiving writ-court relief at first instance.

¶40

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench (Division Bench of G.R. Swaminathan and K. Rajasekar, JJ.; judgment authored by G.R. Swaminathan, J.), 25.07.2025 — W.A(MD)No.2029 of 2025 under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. The appellant, whose passport renewal/reissuance application had not been acted upon by the Regional Passport Officer, Tiruchirappalli, and against whom criminal cases (Crime Nos.573 and 353 of 2020, Nagudi Police Station; Crime No.297 of 2021, Aranthangi Police Station) are stated to be pending, appealed against the single Judge's order dated 25.04.2025 in W.P(MD)No.10019 of 2025. That order had disposed of the writ petition by giving the petitioner liberty to move the Judicial Magistrate, Aranthangi, for the relief sought, contemplating restricted passport validity, appropriate conditions to avoid stalling prosecution, if necessary an application under Section 228 of Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with a special vakalat, and a subsequent application to the jurisdictional Regional Passport Officer. The Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that with three criminal cases pending and taken on file, relief lay only with the trial court and the writ court could not grant relief at the first instance. The Division Bench dismissed the appeal, with no order as to costs, leaving the impugned order undisturbed. No precedent was cited or relied upon.

¶1

W.A(MD)No.2029 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 25.07.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

¶6

W.A(MD)No.2029 of 2025

¶7

Mohammed Azarudeen

¶8

... Appellant / Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The Union of India, Represented by The Regional Passport Officer, Passport Office, Tiruchirappalli – 620 118.

¶11

2.The Inspector of Police, Nagudi Police Station, Nagudi, Aranthangi Taluk, Pudukkottai District. (In Crime Nos.573 of 2020 and 353 of 2020)

¶12

3.The Inspector of Police, Aranthangi Police Station, Aranthangi, Pudukkottai District. (In Crime No.297 of 2021)

¶13

... Respondents/ Respondents

¶14

1/5

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

W.A(MD)No.2029 of 2025

¶17

Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the impugned order dated 25.04.2025 made in W.P(MD)No.10019 of 2025 on the file of this Court and allow the Writ Appeal.

¶18

For Appellant : Mr.J.John

¶19

For Respondents : Mr.K.Govindarajan Deputy Solicitor General of India for R.1

¶20

Mr.T.Senthil Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor for R.2 & R.3

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

(By G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.)

¶23

Heard both sides.

¶24

2.The petitioner sought renewal and reissuance of his passport. The

¶25

passport authority did not act on his application. Hence, the petitioner filed W.P(MD)No.10091 of 2002. The learned single Judge vide order dated 25.04.2025 disposed of the writ petition in the following terms:

¶26

“ 5. The petitioner is given liberty to move the learned Judicial Magistrate, Aranthangi, Pudukottai District, for the relief now sought for. As and when such miscellaneous petition is filed, it shall be numbered and disposed of within

¶27

2/5

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

W.A(MD)No.2029 of 2025

¶30

a period of three weeks thereafter. The learned Trial Judge shall bear in mind that right to travel abroad is a fundamental right. The petitioner's career and avocation may be at stake if he is denied the right to go abroad. Therefore, the learned Trial Court unless there are extraordinary circumstances shall not deny relief. Of course, the period of validity of passport will have to be restricted. It is also open to the learned Trial Judge to stipulate appropriate conditions to ensure that the prosecution is not stalled on account of the petitioner-s absence from India. If necessary, the applicant can be directed to file an application under Section 228 of Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by executing a special vakalat.

¶31

6. Based on the order passed by the learned Trial Court, the petitioner shall move the jurisdictional Regional Passport Officer who shall dispose of the petitionmentioned application in terms of the said order. ”

¶32

Aggrieved by the same, this Writ Appeal has been filed.

¶33

3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the

¶34

jurisdictional Police would submit that there are as many as 3 criminal cases pending against the appellant and they have been taken on file also. Therefore, it is only the trial Court that can grant relief. The writ Court cannot at the first

¶35

3/5

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶37

W.A(MD)No.2029 of 2025

¶38

instance grant relief. The learned single Judge had adopted the right approach.

¶39

Interference with the said order is not warranted.

¶40

4.This Writ Appeal stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶41

[G.R.S., J.] [K.R.S., J.] 25.07.2025

¶42

NCC : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Index MGA

¶43

¶44

1.The Regional Passport Officer, The Union of India, Passport Office, Tiruchirappalli – 620 118.

¶45

2.The Inspector of Police, Nagudi Police Station, Nagudi, Aranthangi Taluk, Pudukkottai District 3.The Inspector of Police, Aranthangi Police Station, Aranthangi, Pudukkottai District.

¶46

4/5

¶47

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶48

W.A(MD)No.2029 of 2025

¶49

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J

¶50

and K.RAJASEKAR, J.

¶51

MGA