Allowed¶21

Senthilkumar v. the Authorised Officer

Madras HC21 Feb 2025WP/6020/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Passport denial due to adverse police report; FIR pendency not a criminal case within meaning of Passport Act; reliance on Arumugam vs Regional Passport Officer, W.A(MD) No. 301 of 2018 (Madras HC Division Bench); writ of mandamus under Article 226 Constitution of India; Regional Passport Office Tiruchirappalli; Inspector of Police, Padalur P.S., Perambalur District; Crime No.128 of 2015 and counter case; direction to issue passport dehors FIRs within eight weeks; no costs; decided 21.02.2025.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed: first respondent directed to consider application No.TR207644284524 and issue the passport in accordance with law, dehors the pendency of the FIRs, within eight weeks of receipt/production of the website uploaded copy of the order, without waiting for certified copy; no costs. ¶21

Senthilkumar Vs the Authorised Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the pendency of two first information reports (including crime No.128 of 2015 and a counter case in the same matter) against the petitioner constitutes a 'criminal case' within the meaning of the Passport Act and an impediment to issuance of a passport. +1 more

¶20

Court's answer

By virtue of the Division Bench decision of this Court in Arumugam vs Regional Passport Officer (W.A(MD) No. 301 of 2018), pending first information reports (with a counter case in the same matter) cannot be considered as a criminal case within the meaning of the Passport Act and therefore are not an impediment to issue of passport.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

The first respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's application No.TR207644284524 and issue the passport in accordance with law, dehors the pendency of the above first information reports against the petitioner.

¶26

Key takeaways

The said exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of the website uploaded copy of the order, without waiting for the certified copy.ratio¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, J.), W.P.No.6020 of 2025, decided 21.02.2025 - Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 seeking issuance of passport (Application No.TR207644284524 dated 07.08.2024) withheld due to adverse police reports. Holding: pending first information reports (crime No.128 of 2015 and a counter case in the same matter) cannot be considered a 'criminal case' within the meaning of the Passport Act, by virtue of the Division Bench decision in Arumugam vs Regional Passport Officer (W.A(MD) No. 301 of 2018), and hence are no impediment to issue of passport. First respondent directed to issue the passport in accordance with law dehors the FIR pendency within eight weeks; no costs.

¶1

W.P.No.6020 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 21.02.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

W.P.No.6020 of 2025

SENTHILKUMAR

... Petitioner

THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI, NEW MUNICIPAL COMPLEX, THILLAI NAGAR, 7TH CROSS, THIRUCHIRAPPALLI-620 018.

¶11

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PADALUR P.S. PERAMBALUR DISTRICT. ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the first and second respondents to issue the passport in Application No.TR207644284524 on 07.08.2024.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Manikandan For R1 : Mr.V.Ashok Kumar Central Government Counsel For R2 : Dr.C.E.Pratap Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶14

ORDER

¶15

1/4

¶16

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

¶17

W.P.No.6020 of 2025

¶18

This writ petition is filed with a prayer directing the respondents to issue the passport for Application No. TR207644284524, dated 07.08.2024.

¶19

The grievance of the petitioner is that when the petitioner made an application for the issuance of a Passport, vide application No.TR207644284524, dated 07.08.2024 the same was not considered due to adverse police reports received by the respondents, indicating that there is a criminal case pending against the petitioner.

¶20

On perusal of the records, it can be seen that there are two first information report pending against the petitioner in crime No. 128 of 2015 and there is also a counter case in the very same matter. Therefore, by virtue of the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in Arumugam vs Regional Passport Officer (W.A(MD) No. 301 of 2018) , the first information reports cannot be considered as a criminal case within the meaning of the Passport Act and thus, it will not be an impediment for issue of passport.

¶21

In view thereof, this writ petition is allowed on the following terms:-

¶22

(i) The first respondent is directed to consider the

¶23

2/4

¶24

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

¶25

W.P.No.6020 of 2025

¶26

application of the petitioner, vide application No. TR207644284524 and issue the passport in accordance with law, dehors the pendency of the above first information reports against the petitioner.

¶27

(ii) The said exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of the website uploaded copy of this order without waiting for the certified copy of the order.

¶28

(iii) No costs.

¶29

21.02.2025

¶30

Neutral Citation: Yes/No nsl

¶31

¶32