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a matrimonial case lodged by his wife, Justice V K Jain directed the passport authority to release his passport which was revoked on the ground of criminal charges against him.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

Appellate authorities under Special Statutes cannot be asked to condone delay

Madras High Court in R.Gowrishankar vs. The Commissioner of Service Tax has held that Appellate authorities cannot be asked to condone the delay, beyond the extended period of limitation A Division Bench comprising of Justices S. Manikumar and D. Krishnakumar, made this observation while considering an appeal filed against Single Bench order declining to set aside the order made in the condone delay petition filed by the petitioner to condone 223 days in filing the appeal before the Commissioner of Service Tax (Appeals). Article referred: http://www.livelaw.in/appellate-authorities-special-statutes-cannot-asked-condone-delay-beyond-extended-period-limitation-madras-hc/
Post a Comment
Read more

'Seize assets to pay damages to accident victim'

Her story might be an inspiration for the physically challenged but justice has remained elusive for her. In 2008, a bus accident left research engineer S Thenmozhi, 30, paraplegic. In April 2013, the motor accident claims tribunal directed the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC) to provide her a compensation of 57.9 lakh. However, TNSTC refused to budge and on Tuesday a city court ordered attaching of movable assets of the transport corporation. Thenmozhi was employed in C-DOT, a telecom technology development centre in Bangalore. On July 21, 2008, she was coming to Chennai in a private bus. Around 2am, the bus had a flat tyre and the driver parked it on the left side of the road near Pallikonda in Vellore district on the Bangalore-Chennai highway. While the tyre was being changed, a TNSTC bus of Dharmapuri division hit the stationary bus. The rear part of the bus was smashed and passengers were injured. Thenmozhi who had a seat at the back of the bus suffered...
Post a Comment
Read more

Mumbai ITAT rules income of offshore discretionary trust is subject to tax in India

The Mumbai Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has recently determined the following issue in the affirmative in the case of Manoj Dhupelia: Should the income of an offshore discretionary trust be subject to tax in India, if no distributions have been made to beneficiaries in India? The question arose from appeals filed by individual beneficiaries in relation to a Lichtenstein-based trust, the Ambrunova Trust and Merlyn Management SA (the Trust) with the ITAT. It is important to note that the individuals in this case were amongst those first identified by the Government of India (GOI) as holding undeclared bank accounts in Lichtenstein. The ITAT ruling raises the following issues: Taxation of Trust Corpus: ITAT classified the corpus of the trust as "undisclosed income" and declared it taxable in the hands of the beneficiaries. Taxation of Undistributed Income: ITAT refused to draw a distinction between the corpus and undistributed income from the trust and declared i...
Post a Comment
Read more