Skip to main content

Passport can't be revoked for criminal charges: Delhi high court

Even if a criminal case is pending against a person the passport office can't as a rule revoke his passport, Delhi high court has clarified. The court said a passport can be impounded only in "appropriate cases" where cogent reasons have to be given in writing by the RPO.

Accepting the plea of a man, facing trial in a matrimonial case lodged by his wife, Justice V K Jain directed the passport authority to release his passport which was revoked on the ground of criminal charges against him. The court, however, directed him not to leave the country without its permission and also asked him to attend the ongoing criminal proceedings.

Allowing Manish Kumar Mittal's plea against the passport authority, Justice Jain noted, "The order passed by the Regional Passport Officer directing the petitioner (Mittal) to surrender his passport as well as the order passed by the appellate authority are, hereby, set aside. The respondents (authorities) are directed to release the passport of the petitioner to him forthwith."

The court also asked the RPO to pass an order within eight weeks after giving an opportunity to Mittal to make his stand clear under provisions of the Passports Act. In order to ensure that Mittal, on getting passport from the RPO, does not flee the country and continues to attend the criminal trial pending against him, the court directed that till a fresh order under the Passport Act is passed, he shall not leave the country without prior permission of the court in which the criminal trial against him is pending.

In his plea, Mittal said that an FIR was registered against him in Dwarka police station following his wife's complaint in 2006. However, on his father-in-law's plea for cancellation of his passport, the RPO had passed an order directing him to surrender his passport without hearing him nor taking into account the fact that the trial court never asked him to surrender his travel document.

Article referred: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-08-07/delhi/41167273_1_regional-passport-officer-passport-authority-getting-passport

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.
Post a Comment
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

No Rebate For Stamp Duty Paid In Another State - Bombay HC

A three judge bench of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (Bombay HC) in a recent judgment in the matter of Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Maharashtra State, Pune and Superintendent of Stamp (Headquarters), Mumbai v Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai and Reliance Petroleum Limited, Gujarat1 has held that orders in case of a scheme of arrangement under Section 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) involving different High Courts in multiple states, are separate instruments in themselves. Accordingly, stamp duty would be payable on all the orders (and consequently, all the states) without the benefit of remission, rebate or set-off.
Post a Comment
Read more