9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 688X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, learned advocate for the petitioner is right in his contention that it is for the precise purpose of leaving this country that return of the petitioner s passport is required and that is his prayer. Additionally, the petitioner has been in India for nearly four years. One does not know whether his visa is valid or not. Overstaying could lead to punishable offences. This is an additional grou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are these. The petitioner had landed in Mumbai on March 15, 2019 and was intercepted by the unit of the respondent no. 2, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence. It was found on a search conducted on the petitioner that he was carrying a canister containing human embryo. This led to the petitioner s arrest by the respondent no. 2 under Section 104 of the Customs Act in connection with offences punish ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nate Bench of this Court, while hearing this writ petition on January 21, 2021, had issued notice to the respondents and called for an affidavit by February 23, 2021. 4. Paragraphs 8 and 9 of the affidavit-in-reply of the respondents dated February 23, 2021, reads as follows: - 8. The passport of the Petitioner has not been impounded or confiscated or retained illegally by the DRI, but has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se had not been disposed of and the Court had expressed an apprehension that the petitioner would flee the country if his passport were returned, thereby affecting the adjudication case. 6. We find no substance in the stand of the respondents that if the passport is returned to him, he will flee the country. In fact, Mr. Dandekar, learned advocate for the petitioner is right in his contention t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
