The Kerala High Court has clarified that the pendency of a criminal case does not justify the denial of a Police Clearance Certificate when an individual seeks to travel abroad for employment. This ruling reinforces the principle that procedural rights under Article 21 are not suspended merely due to unproven allegations.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The petitioner, Revathy Krishnan, is an Indian passport holder who has secured a job offer abroad. To comply with foreign employment requirements, she applied for a Police Clearance Certificate (PCC) from the Regional Passport Office, Thiruvananthapuram. Her application, submitted on 17.04.2026 and acknowledged by receipt Ext.P6, was rejected by the 1st respondent on the sole ground that a criminal case is pending against her.
Key Facts
- The petitioner holds Indian passport No. T9921984, issued on 18.11.2014 (Ext.P1)
- She was granted a work permit by Turks and Caicos Islands on 29.04.2025 (Ext.P2)
- She possesses a valid driving license issued by Turks and Caicos Islands dated 08.12.2025 (Ext.P3)
- She holds a National Health Insurance Plan issued on 10.03.2026 (Ext.P4)
- A First Information Report (FIR) was registered on 05.01.2022 in Crime No. 13/2022 at Chelakkara Police Station, Thrissur District (Ext.P5)
- The criminal case against her is C.C. No. 159 of 2022 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Wadakkanchery
- On 01.06.2026, the Magistrate Court issued Ext.P7 order dispensing with her personal appearance in the case, subject to conditions
- On 18.06.2026, the same court issued Ext.P8 correcting clerical errors in Ext.P7
- The petitioner’s PCC application (Ext.P6) was not processed despite submission on 17.04.2026
- The status of her application was confirmed as pending via the Ministry of External Affairs website (Ext.P9)
Procedural History
- 17.04.2026: Petitioner submitted application for Police Clearance Certificate (Ext.P6)
- 01.06.2026: Magistrate Court granted exemption from personal appearance in C.C. No. 159/2022 (Ext.P7)
- 18.06.2026: Magistrate Court corrected clerical errors in Ext.P7 (Ext.P8)
- Between 17.04.2026 and 03.07.2026: 1st respondent declined to process PCC application citing pending criminal case
- 21.07.2026: Writ Petition (WP(C) No. 21992 of 2026) filed before the Kerala High Court
- 03.07.2026: Court heard the matter and delivered judgment
Relief Sought
The petitioner sought a direction to the 1st respondent to issue a customized Police Clearance Certificate without delay, acknowledging the pendency of the criminal case but not denying the certificate outright.
The Legal Issue
Can the mere pendency of a criminal case justify the refusal to issue a Police Clearance Certificate, when the accused has been granted exemption from personal appearance and seeks to travel abroad for legitimate employment?
Arguments Presented
For the Petitioner
The petitioner relied on Siju v. Regional Passport Officer (2021 KHC 1002), which held that the right to travel abroad under Article 21 is not extinguished by the pendency of a criminal case. She emphasized that the Magistrate Court had already granted exemption from personal appearance, indicating that her presence is not essential for trial proceedings. She argued that denial of PCC without judicial review violates her fundamental right to livelihood and freedom of movement.
For the Respondent
The 1st respondent, through Senior Panel Counsel Sri V. Girish Kumar, contended that under standard protocol, a Police Clearance Certificate cannot be issued to individuals facing criminal charges. He asserted that only a customized certificate, reflecting the pendency of the case, may be issued, and only upon express direction from the High Court.
The Court's Analysis
The Court examined the precedent in Siju v. Regional Passport Officer, which established that the right to travel abroad is a facet of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court noted that the petitioner’s criminal case is not at the trial stage requiring her physical presence, as confirmed by the Magistrate’s order dated 01.06.2026 and its correction on 18.06.2026. The Court observed that the refusal to issue the PCC was based on a blanket administrative policy, not on any individualized assessment of risk or necessity.
"The pendency of a criminal case, without more, cannot be a ground to deny a citizen the right to seek employment abroad. The issuance of a customized Police Clearance Certificate, disclosing the nature of the pending case, strikes the right balance between state interest and individual liberty."
The Court rejected the argument that judicial intervention is mandatory before issuing such a certificate. It held that the Passport Office, as an administrative body, is empowered to issue customized certificates reflecting the status of pending proceedings, without requiring a separate court order.
The Verdict
The writ petition was allowed. The Court directed the 1st respondent to issue a customized Police Clearance Certificate to the petitioner, clearly indicating the pendency of C.C. No. 159 of 2022 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Wadakkanchery. The needful shall be completed within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
What This Means For Similar Cases
PCC Denial Cannot Be Automatic
- Practitioners must now challenge blanket denials of Police Clearance Certificates on the sole ground of pending criminal proceedings
- Administrative refusal without individualized assessment violates Article 21 and is unsustainable in law
Customized Certificates Are the Standard
- The Court has affirmed that customized PCCs - which disclose pending cases but do not deny issuance - are the legally compliant mechanism
- This applies equally to employment, education, or immigration purposes abroad
Judicial Precedent Overrides Administrative Policy
-
Siju v. Regional Passport Officer is now binding precedent for all Passport Offices in Kerala
-
Any policy or circular contradicting this principle must be disregarded
-
Practitioners should cite Siju v. Regional Passport Officer and this judgment when challenging PCC denials
-
Applications for PCC should be accompanied by copies of court orders granting exemption from appearance
-
If denied, a writ petition under Article 226 may be filed with urgency, as the right to livelihood is at stake
