Recently, the the Supreme Court of India held that the Passport Authority cannot unauthorizedly retain a passport, without impounding.

In the said matter, an appeal was filed by a husband whose passport was handed over to the Passport Authority by the Police as he was being prosecuted for offences under Sections 498-A, 403 and 406 IPC, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 in a complaint filed by his wife.

The case was heard before the division bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Rajesh Bindal 

After hearing the arguement of both the parties, the Court held that the direction issued by the police under Section 91 CrPC to the husband to submit his passport was illegal.

Further, the decision of the passport authorities to retain the document as illegal.

“We fail to understand why the passport of the appellant was required for the purpose of the pending criminal case. Therefore, the exercise(of the police) of calling upon the appellant to submit his passport was not legal. Thereafter, the passport was never impounded in exercise of power under Section 10 of PP Act. There is nothing on record to show that the passport was seized under Section 102 of Cr.P.C. As there was neither a seizure of the passport nor impounding thereof, the appellant was entitled to return of the passport.”

The Court highlighted the key issues in the case and offered a detailed view of the legal aspects involved.

In the judgment, Justices stated, “We fail to understand why the passport of the appellant was required for the purpose of the pending criminal case. Therefore, the exercise of calling upon the appellant to submit his passport was not legal.”

Further, the Court clarified that since the appellant followed the prescribed procedure for reporting the loss of his son’s passport in the USA, the son’s passport reissue application should be processed accordingly.