Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 408 (0.75 seconds)
Documents citing Suresh Nanda vs C.B.I on 24 January, 2008

Cheruvathur Chakkutty Thampi vs Union Of India on 24 January, 2017

In so far as impounding of passport is concerned, the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Suresh Nanda vs. CBI mentioned supra, has held that the police may not have power under Section 102 (1) of Code of Civil Procedure to seize a passport or to impound the same. It was further held that impounding of a passport can only be done by the Passport Authority under Section 10 (3) of the Passports Act, 1967. The Honourable Supreme Court has also laid down a distinction and difference between seizing a document and impounding a passport by holding that a seizure is made at a particular moment when a person or authority takes into his possession some property which was earlier not in his possession. However, if after seizing of a property or document the said property or document is retained for some period of time, then such retention amounts to impounding of the property or document. In that case, the Honourable Supreme Court held that the detention of passport by the CBI is held to be illegal and impounding and revoking the passport under Section 10 of the Passport Act is illegal. It was further held that as per Section 104 of Cr.P.C., a 'document' does not include a passport. In the present case, it is not the case of the respondents that they have taken necessary steps under Section 10 of the Passports Act to impound the passport Act and therefore, the mere detention of the passport of the petitioner at the airpott without following the provisions contained under Section 10 of the Passport Act and issuing the look out circular without issuing prior notice are not legally sustainable.
Madras High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 4 - B Rajendran - Full Document

Mr. Sujoy Guha vs State Of Telangana on 6 February, 2024

11. Considering the nature of the offence which was civil in nature and it was not a case of any misappropriation of funds, but violation of a contract and keeping the articles in custody as a lien towards the outstanding amounts due to them, imposition of the condition of deposit of passports is onerous on the petitioners and the said condition is not valid as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Suresh Nanda Vs. C.B.I. (1 supra), it is considered fit to relax the above condition passed by the IV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad in Crl.M.P.No.2137 of 2023 in Crime No.447 of 2023 of P.S. Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.
Telangana High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - G R Rani - Full Document

Jaipuria Buildtech Pvt. Ltd vs Jindal Promoters P. Ltd on 5 December, 2016

In the case of Suresh Nanda v. CBI, Delhi High Court had given directions to the accused to furnish his itinerary and to furnish security while going abroad. Such directions were given to him, while allowing the accused to visit abroad i.e. U.K. However, it has to be seen that in that case the accused was facing the trial under Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 and was charged with non- bailable offences. Therefore, any approach of court taken in that case cannot Page 4 of 6 (Pulastya Pramachala) Additional Sessions Judge (Shahdara) Karkardooma Courts, Delhi Crl. Rev. No.241/16 be guiding factor for the purpose of this case.
Delhi District Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Icici Bank Limited vs The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal on 11 October, 2011

21. A close reading of the said judgment would make it manifestly clear that since impounding of passport infringes the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, such impounding can be made only by following the due procedure established by law. It is needless to point out that the procedure established by law would mean the law made by the Parliament or by the State Legislatures and not otherwise. In the judgment cited supra, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the Passport Act being a special enactment to regulate the issuance of passport and impounding the same, and the Code of Criminal Procedure is a general enactment containing provisions which are procedural in nature, the special enactment shall override the general enactment. With that finding, the Apex Court has held that the criminal Court cannot impound a passport in exercise of the powers conferred under Sections 102 or 104 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Madras High Court Cites 50 - Cited by 4 - D Murugesan - Full Document

Krishnakumar Guruvachan & vs State Of Gujarat on 3 March, 2017

[6] The Court having heard learned advocates for both the sides finds that not only tenor of the application, but the submissions made for the applicants are as if challenge is made to the conditions imposed by this Court while releasing the applicants on anticipatory bail. The applicants, if are aggrieved by any of the conditions imposed by this Court, are to ventilate their grievances before the higher forum and not before this Court by titling the application as an application for modification of the condition. Be that as it may, the condition of surrendering of passport is misconceively perceived by the applicants to be an order of impounding their passports. The Court when imposes condition for deposit of passport while exercising powers under Section 438 it is to ensure that the accused remains within the reach of police and may make himself available by not leaving the territory of India. When Section 438 of the Code permits the Court to impose condition to the accused not to leave India and also permits imposition of any other conditions it deems necessary, the Court would be justified in asking the accused to surrender his passport to ensure due compliance of the condition not to leave India. Mr.Jha would, however, rely on the decision in the case of Suresh Nanda Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2008) 3 SCC 674. In the said case, the police, while conducting search, seized the passport of the appellant therein and in the context of the powers of the police under the Code and the powers to impound the passport under the Passport Act, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held and observed in paragraph nos.9, 10, 11, 12, 15 and 18 as under:
Gujarat High Court Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - C L Soni - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next