LI Network
Published on: December 18, 2023 at 12:35 IST
The Karnataka High Court clarified that neither the Debts Recovery Tribunal nor Civil/Criminal Courts, including the police, possess the authority to impound a citizen’s passport.
Justice M Nagaprasanna, presiding over a single-judge bench, emphasized that Sections 102 or 104 of the Cr.P.C. empower the police to seize documents, but this authority does not extend to the impounding of passports by the civil or criminal courts.
The court asserted that orders directing the deposit of passports during trials were without legal authority, and the Debts Recovery Tribunal scarcely holds such power.
The decision came in response to a petition filed by Nitin Kasliwal, seeking the release of his passport held by the Tribunal.
The court held that the burden to prove otherwise rests on the revenue authorities. It stated that unless the initial onus had been discharged by leading some evidence that may have led itself to the conclusion that the investment was never made, the burden that was cast on the revenue remained undischarged.
The case involved proceedings initiated by companies-lenders seeking repayment and attachment of properties.
The Tribunal, acting under Section 22(2)(h) read with Section 19(25) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, ordered the surrender of Kasliwal’s passport, prohibiting him from leaving the country without the Tribunal’s permission.
The court scrutinized the records and observed that the issuance and impounding of passports are governed by the Passports Act, 1967.
The Passport Authority, as per Section 10(3) of the Act, has the power to impound or revoke a passport if criminal proceedings are pending against the passport holder in an Indian court.
The court emphasized that the Passport Act, being a special enactment, prevails over any power exercised by civil or criminal courts to impound passports.
Referring to the Supreme Court judgment in the case of SURESH NANDA v. CBI (2008), the court highlighted that the impounding of a passport is within the authority vested under the Passport Act.
The retention of the passport by the Tribunal cannot be justified under the Act, and the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus for the release of the passport.
The court directed the Tribunal to promptly release the passport, clarifying that the order does not hinder the authorities under the Passports Act, 1967, from exercising their power.
Case Citation: Nitin Kasliwal And Debt Recovery Tribunal, 2023