LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

HariOm HariOm (Technical Head)     26 September 2013

Passport Release 498A

Hi All, I was framed in a false dowry case in Gurgaon by my wife and her family and, during my bail, since her lawyer insisted that my passport be taken on file so I couldn't *flee the country*, I was asked to deposit passport within 10 days of bail which I did! I have a 10 years US Business VISA and have made a couple of foreign visits regarding work.

 

Now, 9 months have filed since FIR and bail, chargesheet was submitted within a month of FIR. Till now, the charges haven't been framed and my passport is languishing on file.

 

My lawyer recently filed a "bail condition relaxation" application for release of passport with trial court which the judge rejected saying I might flee the country. The judge is very new and young, having joined only 2 months back, and has been giving dates after every 4-5 days without any progress on the status.

 

My lawyer even showed a few judgments of supreme court under passport act showing that courts can't impound passport but only seize it for some time. He also argued that since the investigation was over 6-7 months back when the challan was filed, I be given back my passport since I need to travel for work.

 

Now, I need to appeal this decision in Sessions/High Court/Supreme Court!

 

I would like some help/guidance on the following:

1) Why do the trial court judges keep impounding passports left and right even when supreme court judgments are already in place regarding the same?

2) Where do I appeal this order and what are the normal lawyer charges for making such a Criminal Rev. Petition in Sessions? I can't directly go to the High Court?

3) Does someone have any Bail Relaxation Petition template for Passport Release? 

4) The case is completely made up and false, should I appeal for a quash or should I stand trial and let the case run down by itself?

 

Would appreciate any inputs very much! Thank you!



Learning

 12 Replies

Sarvesh Kumar Sharma Advocate (Advocacy)     26 September 2013

1.go to revision court for this issue.

Sarvesh Kumar Sharma Advocate (Advocacy)     26 September 2013

Against the magistrate's order you can move to Session court .

Rama chary Rachakonda (Secunderabad/Telangana state Highcourt practice watsapp no.9989324294 )     26 September 2013

Appeal to sessions court.

Shonee Kapoor (Legal Evangelist - TRIPAKSHA)     26 September 2013

You may go in revision against the said order. As for charges and all, every lawyer charges as per his standing in the court,

 

Regards,

 
Shonee Kapoor

If you don't fight for what you want, don't cry for what you LOST.
1 Like

HariOm HariOm (Technical Head)     07 October 2013

Thanks Guys! This "revision", is it to be done in Sessions Court of Gurgaon or Punjab Haryana High Court?

Is there some restriction that if sessions doesn't pass favorable order, then you can't appeal in a higher court?

Another question, I have been given evidence date in 498a, can I seek personal exemption under 205/273 till cross or 313 happens?

Shonee Kapoor (Legal Evangelist - TRIPAKSHA)     07 October 2013

1. You may go in revision in Session Court or High Court, both have concurrent powers. However, I would advise to go in Court of Sessions.

2. You may challange the Session Court order in Writ, if it goes against you.

3. You may file for exemption, but the court has the sole power to grant it. It is not a matter of right.

 

 

Regards,

 
Shonee Kapoor

If you don't fight for what you want, don't cry for what you LOST.

 

HariOm HariOm (Technical Head)     07 October 2013

Thanks Shonee, you are an invaluable help.

 

I will be seeking the below listed relief from the Sessions Judge! Points 1 & 2 can be filed under Sections 439(1)b. But What about Point 3? It should be sought under section 205 or 273 or 317? The trial judge will fix charges in 1-2 days (I just need to sign, arguments are over) and has given date in nov. for starting Evidence.

 

I read in a Andhra High Court judgment that S. 273 requires that the evidence shall be recorded in the presence of the accused unless his presence is dispensed with u/s. 317, Cr.P.C. So which section to file application to sessions judge for point 3? Point no. 3 is linked to Points 1 & 2 very closely, so separate application for it doesn't make any sense. Please advice.

 

1.  Waiver of bail condition impounding Petitioner’s Passport

 

2. Waiver of bail condition of not travelling abroad without Court’s permission

 

3. Personal Exemption from Attendance till petitioner’s personal presence is considered necessary by the trial Court since travelling abroad may affect the normal pace of trial if petitioner’s personal attendance is insisted upon on each & every date

Shonee Kapoor (Legal Evangelist - TRIPAKSHA)     08 October 2013

You may file exemption u/s 205 CrPC and give an undertaking that the evidence taken in front of your counsel would be binding on you.

 

Regards,

 
Shonee Kapoor

If you don't fight for what you want, don't cry for what you LOST.

HariOm HariOm (Technical Head)     10 October 2013

a.      These judgments may help people looking for passport release.

 

        Waiver of Bail Condition Impounding Petitioner’s Passport

 

According to Section 10(3) of the Passports Act, 1967 only the passport authority is empowered to impound the passport. The following cases are cited in favor of argument.

 

 

i)                   Supreme Court Judgment in “SURESH NANDA v/s CBI, 24-Jan-2008

In our opinion, even the Court cannot impound a passport. Though, no doubt, Section 104 Cr.P.C. states that the Court may, if it thinks fit, impound any document or thing produced before it, in our opinion, this provision will only enable the Court to impound any document or thing other than a passport. This is because impounding a passport is provided for in Section 10(3) of the Passports Act. The Passports Act is a special law while the Cr.P.C. is a general law. It is well settled that the special law prevails over the general law vide G.P. Singh's Principles of Statutory Interpretation (9th Edition pg. 133). This principle is expressed in the maxim Generalia specialibus non derogant. Hence, impounding of a passport cannot be done by the Court under Section 104 Cr.P.C. though it can impound any other document or thing.

 

ii)                 Chhattisgarh High Court Judgment in “PUSHPAL SWARNKAR v/s STATE of CHHATTISGARH, 03-Dec-2008

According to Section 10(3) of the Passports Act, 1967 only the passport authority is empowered to impound the passport. In this case, the Additional Sessions Judge has imposed the condition to deposit the passport and visa for which he is not empowered. The Court below has committed illegality and exceeded the jurisdiction vested on it. Therefore, the order impugned requires to be modified.

 

iii)               Kolkata High Court Judgment in “AMITAVA BHOWMIK v/s UNION of INDIA & ORS, 11-Apr-2012

 

“Here, the petitioner is an accused in proceedings initiated on the basis of a complaint lodged by his wife. It is not the case of the passport authority that the petitioner is involved in any activity that exposes the country to security risk.”

 

The passport authority is directed to restore passport facilities in favor of the petitioner subject to such terms and conditions that it may be consider necessary to impose in the interest of the sovereignty of the country...”

 

b.      Waiver of Bail Condition of Taking Court’s Permission to Travel Abroad

 

i)                   Delhi High Court Judgment in “NANDINI BHATNAGAR v/s STATE GOVT. of NCT of DELHI, 14-Dec-2012 (Crl.M.C. 4231/2012)

It is settled law that right to travel is a facet of personal liberty and is protected by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. (See Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India & Anr., (1978) 1 SCC 248 and Satwant Sing Sawhney Vs. D. Ramarathnam, Assistant Passport Officer, Government of India, New Delhi & Ors., AIR 1976 SC 1836)…

This Court also takes judicial notice of the fact that the condition of obtaining prior permission before leaving the boundary of Delhi is a cumbersome one as the permission takes time and causes hardship to the petitioner. This Court is of the view that the impugned condition would certainly restricts the accused's fundamental right to travel

Undoubtedly, the accused's right to travel can be curtailed by a reasonable, transparent and fair procedure, but in the opinion of this Court such a restriction should be rarely imposed by the trial court while granting bail and that too, for cogent reasons.

Consequently, present petition is allowed and the condition imposed by the impugned order dated 06th October, 2012 restraining the petitioner from leaving the boundary of the NCT of Delhi as well as the NCR and the Country without the prior permission of the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate is set aside.

 

ii)                 Delhi High Court Judgment in “HARPREET SINGH v/s STATE GOVT. of NCT of DELHI, 16-Aug-2004

 

On filing of the above undertakings, before the learned Trial Court condition imposed in the bail order dated 9.4.2003, directing that the petitioner, shall not leave country, without prior permission of the Court, shall stand waived. The ratio of the decisions cited by the learned Counsel for the complainant are not applicable to the facts at hand.

 

1 Like

Reformist !!! (Other)     10 October 2013

Shonee Ji,

I have a question related to the same.

If Sessions court again rejects the revision for passport, then can Hariom go to HC and then to SC if HC rejects it

OR, revision is allowed only 2 times ie till Sessions court.

And if one wants to fight this till SC, what is the way out. PLS Guide.

Mohammed Khan (Engineer)     04 July 2017

Hi,

I am currently residing out of the courtry and my ex filed 498A with all false allegations. It is currently in the beginning stage and charge sheet has not filed. My job in abroad is travelling to different countries.

How can I stop impounding my passport incase it is going to be impounded. Any precautions to be considered before hand. Please note I do not want to come to India in the next 2 years untill I get citizenship of the country where I am currently living abroad. Please could you advise please considering my travelling job out of india.

Also, Can I get permanent exemption without attending court hearings in person?

 

Thanks. 

Sandeep Pamarati (Advocate)     22 July 2018

Reformist, Second Revision is not admissable unless the order of the lower court is infested with maladies.

Appeal is what one has to use to knock on the doors of higher courts.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register