Chattisgarh High Court
Pushpal Swarnkar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 3 December, 2008
Author: T.P. Sharma
Bench: T.P. Sharma
HIGH COURT OF CHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Criminal Revision No 715 of 2008
Pushpal Swarnkar
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh
...Respondents
! Mr. Vivek Sharma, counsel for the petitioner
^ Miss Sangeeta Mishra, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent
Mr. M.P.S. Bhatia, counsel for objector Smt. Nikita Swarnakar
Honble Mr. T.P. Sharma, J
Dated: 03/12/2008 : Judgment {Criminal revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973} ORAL ORDER (3-12-2008)
1. On a mention being made, the matter is taken up for hearing.
2. This revision is directed against the order dated 15-9- 2008 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Durg in Bail Application No.1291/2008, whereby the Court below while allowing the bail application has imposed a condition upon the petitioner to deposit his Visa & Passport (in original) in the Court at the time of execution of the bail bonds.
3. It is submitted that any condition imposing the impounding of passport is not permissible under law and the Court has committed illegality.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the order impugned as also the record of the trial Court.
5. By the order impugned, learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Durg has admitted the petitioner to bail and also imposed four conditions out of which condition No.3 reads as follows: -
vkosnd tekur ds izi= is"k djrs oDr mldh ohtk ,oa ikliksVZ U;k;ky; esa vly tek djok;sxk A By imposing condition No.3 the Court below has directed the petitioner to deposit original passport & Visa in the Court.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in accordance with Section 10 (3) of the Passports Act, 1967 even the Court cannot impound the passport. The Passports Act is a special law while the Cr.P.C. is a general law. It is well settled that the special law prevails over the general law. Learned counsel placed reliance in the matter of Suresh Nanda v. C.B.I. (2008 Cri. L.J. 1599) in which the Apex Court has held that even the Court cannot impound the passport. Impounding of a passport can only be done by the passport authority under Section 10 (3) of the Passports Act, 1967. Para 15 of the judgment of the Apex Court in the above cited case reads thus:
"In our opinion, even the Court cannot impound a passport. Though, no doubt, Section 104, Cr.P.C. states that the Court may, if it thinks fit, impound any document or thing produced before it, in our opinion, this provision will only enable the Court to impound any document or thing other than a passport. This is because impounding a "passport" is provided for in Section 10 (3) of the Passports Act. The Passports Act is a special law while the Cr.P.C. is a general law. It is well settled that the special law prevails over the general law vide G.P. Singh's Principles of Statutory Interpretation (9th Edition pg.133). This principle is expressed in the maxim "Generalia specialibus non derogant". Hence, impounding of a passport cannot be done by the Court under Section 104, Cr.P.C. though it can impound any other document or thing."
7. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State/ respondent and the objector supported the order impugned and opposed the revision.
8. According to Section 10 (3) of the Passports Act, 1967 only the passport authority is empowered to impound the passport. In this case, the Additional Sessions Judge has imposed the condition to deposit the passport & Visa for which he is not empowered. The Court below has committed illegality and exceeded the jurisdiction vested on it. Therefore, the order impugned requires to be modified.
9. Consequently, the revision is allowed and condition No.3 imposed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Durg in Bail Application No.1291/2008 vide the order impugned is hereby quashed.
JUDGE