Disposed¶23

Syed Mohamed K v. The Regional Passport Office

Madras HC27 Feb 2026WP(MD)/5294/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Passport renewal mandamus under Article 226; Regional Passport Officer, Madurai; petitioner implicated in Cr.No.53 of 2018 (Thenkarai Police Station); FIR challenged in Crl.O.P.No.19416 of 2025 with interim stay granted 24.11.2025; no charge sheet laid; no legal impediment to passport issuance; first respondent directed to pass orders within four weeks; petition disposed, no costs; single-judge bench R.Vijayakumar; decided 27.02.2026.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with a direction to the first respondent (Regional Passport Officer) to pass orders on the petitioner's request for issuance of a passport within four weeks from receipt of a copy of the order; no costs awarded. ¶23

Syed Mohamed K Vs The Regional Passport Office — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the first respondent (the Regional Passport Officer, Madurai) should process the petitioner's passport application No.25-1067538998 and issue him a renewed passport pursuant to his representation dated 09.02.2026, as sought through a Writ of Mandamus under Article 226. +1 more

¶18

Court's answer

The first respondent is directed to pass orders on the petitioner's request for issuance of the passport within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

Since no charge sheet had been laid so far and the FIR investigation stood stayed by this Court, there is no legal impediment for the first respondent to consider the petitioner's request for issuance of the passport.

¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (Article 226, Constitution of India) before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, disposed of by R.Vijayakumar, J. on 27.02.2026 (W.P.(MD)No.5294 of 2026). Petitioner K.Syed Mohamed sought a mandamus directing the first respondent, the Regional Passport Officer, Madurai, to process his passport application No.25-1067538998 and issue a renewed passport pursuant to his representation dated 09.02.2026. The State (Second Respondent, Inspector of Police, Thenkarai Police Station) pointed out that the petitioner was implicated in Cr.No.53 of 2018, the FIR whereof had been challenged in Crl.O.P.No.19416 of 2025 with an interim stay of further investigation granted by this Court on 24.11.2025. Observing that no charge sheet had been laid and the FIR stood stayed, the Court held that there was no legal impediment for the first respondent to consider the petitioner's request for issuance of the passport, and directed the first respondent to pass orders within four weeks of receipt of a copy of the order. Petition disposed of; no costs.

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶2

DATED: 27.02.2026

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶5

W.P.(MD)No.5294 of 2026

K.Syed Mohamed

...Petitioner

The Regional Passport Office, The Regional Passport Officer, Claret Plaza, Melakkal Main Road, Kochadai, Madurai.

¶10

State Rep By, Inspector of Police, Thenkarai Police Station, Periyakulam, Theni. ... Respondents

¶11

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1^st respondent to process the application of the petitioner in application No.25-1067538998 and issue renewed passport to the petitioner based on petitioner's representation dated 09.02.2026 within the time frame fixed by this Court.

¶12

For Petitioner : M/s.K.K.Udayakumar

¶13

For Respondents : Mr.M.Ashok Central Government Standing Counsel for R1 M/s.M.Aasha Government Advocate(crl.side) for R2

¶14

¶15

1/4

¶16

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

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The present writ petition has been filed seeking a mandamus directing the first respondent to process the application of the petitioner and renew the passport of the petitioner based upon his representation dated 09.02.2026.

¶19

The learned Government Advocate(crl.side) appearing for the second

¶20

respondent submits that the petitioner has been implicated in a criminal case in Cr.No.53 of 2018 on the file of the second respondent. The FIR has been challenged in Crl.O.P.No.19416 of 2025 and this Court was pleased to grant an order of interim stay for further investigation on 24.11.2025.

¶21

Therefore, it is clear that so far charge sheet has not been laid and FIR

¶22

has been stayed by this Court. In such circumstances, there is no legal impediment for the first respondent to consider the request to the petitioner for issuance of the passport. The first respondent is directed to pass orders within a period of 4(four) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶23