A single judge bench of the Madras High Court, Madurai Bench comprising of Justice Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup reiterated that any Court of law does not have power to impound the passport. It is the discretion of the passport authorities. If at all the learned Magistrate intends to restrict the movements of the Petitioner from India to any other Country, he has to address the authorities concerned under the Passport Act.
Facts:
The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that this petition has been filed on behalf of the accused regarding condition imposed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi in Crime No. 24 of 2022 when the accused sought bail. In the course of furnishing sureties, the learned Counsel for the defacto Complainant objected stating that the Court has to impose certain conditions and thereby the likelihood of the Petitioner escaping from the Country has to be avoided. In the light of the apprehension expressed by the learned Counsel for the defacto Complainant, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi had imposed condition whereby directed the Petitioner to surrender his passport. Accordingly, the Petitioner had surrendered his passport. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that as per the ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Suresh Nanda vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (2008) 3 SCC 674, passport cannot be impounded by any Court of law. Therefore, he seeks to set aside the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi.
Arguments of the Public Prosecutor:
The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that there are two accused in this case. The learned Magistrate had not remanded the accused as per the reported ruling of the Honourable Supreme Court of India in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and another [2014 (8) SCC 273]. Thereafter, the Petitioner had surrendered before the Court concerned who had granted bail with conditions.
Observations of the Court:
The court held that any Court of law does not have power to impound the passport. It is the discretion of the passport authorities. If at all the learned Magistrate intends to restrict the movements of the Petitioner from India to any other Country, he has to address the authorities concerned under the Passport Act. Even if the apprehension expressed by the learned Counsel for the defacto Complainant is granted, the accused can be secured through the Indian Mission abroad throughout the world. Passport verification is to be done by the police officials. Therefore, they are well within their right to execute appropriate orders on the basis of the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate or Sessions Judge to issue Look Out Notice also for securing the accused through the Indian Mission abroad.
Decision:
The learned Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi was directed to pass appropriate alternate orders in spite of directing the Petitioner to surrender his passport till the trial is concluded. The Petitioner was directed to co-operate with the trial if at all the matter ends up in laying charge sheet. With the aforementioned direction, the Criminal Original Petition stood disposed of.
Case: Ramkumar vs The Sub Inspector of Police All Women Police Station
Citation: CRL. O.P. (MD) No.21061 of 2022 and Crl. M.P. (MD) No.14754 of 2022
Coram: JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
Pronounced on: 28.11.2022
Read Judgment
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
0 Comments