Allowed¶28

S.Balaji v. the State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC3 Apr 2025WP/11818/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Passport denial due to adverse police report / pending FIR (Crime No.763 of 2021; Sections 147, 294(b), 323, 324, 342, 506(ii) & 307 IPC r/w 4 TNPHW Act); Article 226 mandamus to Regional Passport Officer, Tiruchirapalli; FIR not a criminal case for purposes of the Passport Act per Division Bench decision in Arumugam Vs. Regional Passport Officer, W.A(MD).No.301 of 2018, reiterated by Government of India Rules; passport to be issued de hors FIR within 8 weeks of web copy; writ petition allowed; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent (Regional Passport Officer) to consider the petitioner's application No.241014741759 dated 10.12.2024 and issue the passport de hors the pending FIR if there is no other impediment, within 8 weeks of receipt of the web copy of the order; no costs. ¶28

S.Balaji Vs the State of Tamilnadu — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the pendency of the First Information Report against the petitioner (adverse police report in Crime No.763 of 2021) can stand in the way of processing his passport application and issuing the passport.

¶27

Court's answer

Following the Division Bench decision in Arumugam Vs. Regional Passport Officer (W.A(MD).No.301 of 2018), reiterated by the Government of India in the Rules, that a First Information Report cannot be considered as a criminal case for the purpose of the Passport Act, this Court holds that the pending FIR cannot be an impediment to issuing the passport.

¶27

Ratio / Principle

The third respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's application bearing reference No.241014741759 dated 10.12.2024 and issue the passport de hors the pendency of the First Information Report, if there is no other impediment.

¶33

Key takeaways

The said exercise of considering the application and issuing the passport shall be completed within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of the web copy of the order, without waiting for the certified copy.ratio¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, J.) in W.P.No.11818 of 2025, decided 03.04.2025: Writ petition under Article 226 seeking a Writ of Mandamus to the Regional Passport Officer, Tiruchirapalli, to issue a passport on application reference No.241014741759 dated 10.12.2024. The application had not been considered upon receipt of an adverse police report, the petitioner being an accused in Crime No.763 of 2021 for offences under Sections 147, 294 (b), 323, 324, 342, 506 (ii) & 307 of IPC r/w 4 of TNPHW Act. Relying on the Division Bench decision in Arumugam Vs. Regional Passport Officer, W.A(MD).No.301 of 2018, that a First Information Report cannot be considered as a criminal case for the purpose of the Passport Act, as reiterated by the Government of India in the Rules, the Court held the FIR cannot be an impediment, allowed the writ petition, and directed issuance of the passport de hors the pending FIR if no other impediment exists, within 8 weeks of receipt of the web copy, without waiting for the certified copy; no costs.

¶1

W.P.No.11818 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 03.04.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶6

W.P.No.11818 of 2025

¶7

S.Balaji ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by its Secretary to Government, Home Department Fort St. George Chennai 600 009.

¶10

2.The Inspector of Police Mangalamedu P.S. Perambalur Dist.

¶11

3.The Regional Passport Officer Plot No.A5, Salai Road and Shastri Road Junction Thillai Nagar Thiruchirapalli. ...Respondents

¶12

1/5

¶13

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

¶14

Prayer :

¶15

W.P.No.11818 of 2025

¶16

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to

¶17

issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent to issue passport to

¶18

the petitioner based on the petitioner application reference No.241014741759 dated 10.12.2024 in accordance with law.

¶19

For Petitioner : M/s.T.Dharani For R1 : Mr.V.Venkata Seshaia Government Advocate For R2 : Dr.C.E.Pratap for R2 Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R3 : Mr.S.Kasi, for R3 (CGSC)

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This Writ Petition is filed for a prayer to issue of passport to the petitioner based on his application bearing reference No.241014741759 dated

¶22

10.12.2024.

¶23

2. Upon hearing the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

¶24

2/5

¶25

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

¶26

W.P.No.11818 of 2025

¶27

petitioner and Mr.V.Venkata Seshaia, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the first respondent, Dr.C.E.Pratap, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing on behalf the second respondent and Mr.S.Kasi, learned Central Government Standing Counsel and perusing the affidavit filed in support of the case and the material records of the case, it can be seen that upon receipt of an adverse police report the petitioner request is not considered. It can be seen that the petitioner is shown as an accused in Crime No.763 of 2021 for alleged offences under Section 147, 294 (b), 323, 324, 342, 506 (ii) & 307 of IPC r/w 4 of TNPHW Act. It is now clear that the Division Bench of this Court in Arumugam Vs. Regional Passport Officer, W.A(MD).No.301 of 2018 has held at the First Information Report cannot be considered as a criminal case for the purpose of the Passport Act which is also reiterated by the Government of India in the Rules. Therefore the same cannot be an impediment.

¶28

3. In view thereof, this Writ Petition is allowed on the following

¶29

terms;

¶30

3/5

¶31

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

¶32

W.P.No.11818 of 2025

¶33

(i) The third respondent is directed to consider the application of the petitioner bearing reference No.241014741759 dated 10.12.2024 and issue passport to him de hors the pendency of the First Information Report if there is no other impediment. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of the web copy of the order, without waiting for the certified copy of the order.

¶34