Sri Apurba Brahma vs The Union Of India And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 5576 Cal

17th August,
  2022
  (AK)
   03



                                   W.P.A 8277 of 2022

                                    Sri Apurba Brahma
                                             Vs.
                               The Union of India and others


                            Mr. Sekhar Barman
                            Mr. Rohit Prosad
                                                    ...for the petitioner.

                            Mr. S. Bera
                                                  ...for the respondents.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the

passport of the petitioner was impounded on April 20,

2022 on grounds unknown to the petitioner.

Although it is provided in Section 10-A of the

Passports Act, 1967 that such impoundment cannot

exceed four weeks and if it is to be extended thereafter,

the Central Government or the designated officer has to

pass a reasoned order recorded in writing for such

extension, no reasoned order has been communicated to

the petitioner, nor any hearing has been given to the

petitioner till date.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent

authorities contends that a notice was given for hearing

the petitioner as long back as on July 5, 2021.

However, since the petitioner skipped the

opportunity and did not turn up, ultimately the passport

was seized on April 20, 2022.

Yet, learned counsel for the respondent authorities

fails to produce any order or instruction to the effect that

the impoundment was extended by a reasoned order in

writing after the expiry of four weeks from its seizure.

In such view of the matter, the further

withholding/impoundment of the passport is patently

illegal.

The judgment of Suresh Nanda Vs. Central Bureau of

Investigation reported at (2008) 3 SCC 674, relied on by

the petitioner also provides that since impounding of a

passport has civil consequences, the Passport Authority

must give an opportunity of hearing to the person

concerned before impounding his passport.

Although it has been alleged by the respondent

authorities that the petitioner did not appear despite

getting opportunity of hearing, the subsequent

continuation of impoundment without a reasoned order

in writing is palpably de hors the law.

However, it has to be noted that since admittedly

criminal cases are pending against the petitioner, the

immediate release of the passport may result in

consequences which will be irretrievable.

Hence, keeping in view such factual scenario, WPA

8277 of 2022 is disposed of by directing the respondent

no.4, that is, the Regional Passport Officer, Kolkata to

immediately issue a notice to the petitioner for hearing

the petitioner on the question of further extension of the

impoundment of his passport.

Such notice shall be given within a week from date

and the hearing will be given within three weeks from

date.

Upon such hearing being given, the respondent

authorities shall take a call on extension and pass a

reasoned order for extension, in the event the

impoundment is extended; otherwise the passport shall

be released in favour of the petitioner by the respondent

authorities.

The entire exercise must be mandatorily completed

within four weeks from date.

There will be no order as to costs.

Urgent photostat copies of this order, if applied for,

be given to the parties upon compliance of all requisite

formalities.

(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)