The Allahabad High Court ruled that authorities do not have to seize a person’s passport solely because a criminal case is pending against them.
The court clarified that the Passport Act uses the term “may,” which gives passport officers discretion to seize the passport under certain conditions, provided they record their reasons. However, this discretion does not obligate officers to seize the passport in every case. Consequently, the court canceled the order to seize the petitioner’s passport.
Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Manjeev Shukla made this decision in response to a petition filed by Mohammad Umar.
Not have to seize passport in every instance
Umar, who worked in Saudi Arabia, faced charges from his wife, Fatima Zahra, filed at the Mahila Thana, Ambedkar Nagar, including dowry harassment. The Regional Passport Officer had ordered the seizure of his passport based on these pending charges. Umar challenged this order in the High Court.
Umar argued that while the passport officer can seize a passport when criminal proceedings are pending. It is not mandatory to do so in every instance. He claimed that seizing his passport was unfair and not supported by law.
The court noted that Umar faced a criminal case related to marital discord, and the High Court had stayed the proceedings. Reconciliation efforts were ongoing between the parties. The court found that the decision to seize the passport did not consider these facts adequately. Accepting Umar’s petition, the court annulled the passport confiscation order dated May 30, 2023, and directed the issuance of a new order within six weeks.
