Saudi-Based Man Facing Two Criminal Cases Must Return Within 3 Months As Madras HC Directs Consulate To Consider A 3-Month Passport

The petitioner, employed in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, sought reissuance of his passport, which was due to expire on 6 November 2026.

Two criminal matters were pending against him in courts at Ramanathapuram: Special SC No. 27 of 2023 and Criminal MP No. 3171 of 2023.

As the petitioner was in Saudi Arabia, the Court noted that the reissuance would have to be dealt with by the Consulate General of India, Jeddah.

The petitioner submitted a draft affidavit undertaking, among other things, to return to India within three months, participate in the criminal proceedings, and accept a restricted passport validity. His counsel also undertook to provide sureties to the satisfaction of the courts concerned

The Consulate General was impleaded suo motu

The Court exercised its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, invoked in the petition’s prayer

It did not cite or analyse any specific passport statute, rule, or precedent.

The operative principle applied was that the petitioner’s request could be considered subject to safeguards directed by the Court, including an undertaking to return and participate in the pending cases, provision of sureties, and a limited passport validity

Given the pending criminal cases and the petitioner’s residence abroad, the Court linked passport reissuance to measures intended to ensure his attendance before the relevant courts.

It relied on the proposed affidavit undertaking, counsel’s assurance regarding sureties, and a police No Objection Certificate as safeguards.

On that basis, it directed conditional consideration of a passport request for a three-month validity period rather than granting unconditional reissuance

The petitioner was directed to submit an affidavit substantially in the form placed before the Court by 6 November 2026, provide sureties to the satisfaction of both courts within one week of receiving the order, and return to India within three months to participate in the pending proceedings.

If a non-bailable warrant had been issued, he was required to surrender before the relevant court within that period.

Subject to compliance, the second respondent was directed to issue a No Objection Certificate, and the third respondent was directed to consider issuing a passport valid for three months.

The authorities were directed to act urgently; no costs were ordered