9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 420X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at Exhibit "A" - page No.27 of the Application. The said condition No.3 is reflecting on page No.28 of the Application and it reads thus:- "3. Applicants are directed not to leave India without prior permission of the Court and DRI Department is allowed to retain their passport until further orders and applicants to submit their passport with department within three days after their release." 3. Dr. Kantawala, learned Advocate for Applicant has placed before me the order dated 05.02.2025 passed in Criminal Bail Application No.434 of 2024 filed by one of the co-accused in the same crime. An identical order with the same condition No.3 on the same date was passed in the case of the said co-accused also. Applicant therein namely co-accuse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the provisions of Sections 10(3)(e) and 10-A of the Passports Act, 1967 and it would indirectly amount to impounding of the passport. In paragraph Nos.7 to 10 in the order dated 05.02.2025, I have delineated the reasons and the grounds on which the said condition No.3 requires to be deleted as it is onerous by the Court. The said reasons stated in the aforesaid order applies squarely to the case of the Applicant also. For convenience, the aforesaid paragraph Nos.7 to 10 are delineated hereunder:- "7. I have perused the record placed before me. At the outset it is seen that passport is not an incriminating document in the prosecution case and hence seizure of passport permanently prima facie would stand contrary to the provisions of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y amounts to retention of the passport by the Court. As delineated above, the Passports Act is a special law while Cr.P.C. is a general law and it is well settled that the special law prevails over the general law. This principle is expressed in the maxim generalia specialibus non derogant. 9. In view of the my above observations and decisions of the Supreme Court in the case of Suresh Nanda (1st Supra) followed by decisions in the case of M.T. Enrica Laxie Vs. Doramma3; S.Sathyanarayana Vs. State of Karnataka4; Sir Mohammed Tasnim Vs. State of Karnataka5; Devashish Garg Vs. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence6; Veenita Gupta Vs. State7; State of Maharashtra Vs. Tapas D. Neogy8; Avinash Bhosale Vs. Union of India9 and Jignesh Prakash Sha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
