S/L 14 24.09.2026 Court. No. 25 Sourav WPA 18645 of 2026 Aniruddha Mukherjee Vs. The Union of India & Ors. Mr. M.R. Sarbadikari Mr. Soupal Chatterjee Ms. Madhumita Chatterjee … for the petitioner. Mr. Dhiraj Trivedi, Ld. ASG Mr. Kumar Jyoti Tewari, Sr. Adv. Mr. Amrit Sinha Mr. Aniruddha Tewari … for the Union of India. 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ application praying for a direction upon the passport authority for renewal of the passport. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was having the passport but in the meantime, a criminal case was initiated against the petitioner and passport was seized during investigation. In the criminal case, the petitioner has made an application on April 14, 2022 for renewal of passport and accordingly, the learned Judge-in-Charge, Special 2nd Court, Kolkata has returned the passport of the petitioner for the purpose of renewal on the condition that the same will be returned back to the Court immediately after the renewal. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in spite of the order passed by the learned criminal court, the passport authority has not renewed the passport of the petitioner and, accordingly, the petitioner has filed the writ application before this Court being WPA 7313 of 2024. By an order dated August 6, 2024, this Court has given liberty to the petitioner to approach the passport 2 authority with the server copy of the order for the renewal of the passport. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in spite of the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the passport authority has not renewed the passport and closed the application of the petitioner. Subsequently, the petitioner has made an application under ‘Tatkal’ for renewal of the passport that has also not been considered and the same is pending before the passport authority. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the passport authority has filed report and submits that the earlier application filed by the petitioner is closed and, subsequently, the petitioner has filed an application under ‘Tatkal’ but the ‘Tatkal’ application cannot be considered for renewal of the passport of the petitioner as the petitioner is having the criminal case pending before the criminal court. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the passport authority submits that unless and until the petitioner will not approach the criminal court for obtaining no objection, it is not possible for the passport authority for renewal of the passport of the petitioner. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. Perused the materials on record. 8. Initially, in the year 2022, the petitioner has obtained an order from the criminal court for renewal of the passport and the petitioner has made an application for renewal of passport but one or the other reason, the said application was closed without renewal of the passport. Now the petitioner has made and application under ‘Tatkal’ for 3 renewal, but the same cannot be proceeded as the criminal case is pending against the petitioner. 9. The writ petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioner to approach the trial court/criminal court where the criminal case is pending for renewal of passport and for permission to leave India for certain period and if any application is made, the trial court/criminal court shall dispose of the same as early as possible preferably within two weeks from the date of filing of application, if any. 10. If the petitioner obtained any order from the criminal court for renewal of the passport and leaving India, the passport authority shall take appropriate steps for renewal of passport within in a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the application, if any, filed by the petitioner. 11. WPA 18645 of 2026 is disposed of. 12. Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all the necessary formalities. (Krishna Rao, J.)