Final Order 1

Order Details: Order Below EX 1
Pdf Text: … 1 … C.C.No.33/MISC./2023
Exh.01
MHMM180004802023
C.C.No.33/MISC./2023
SHREE PRAKASH
NANDKISHORE GUPTA Vs.
KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK
LIMITED
IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, 58TH COURT,
BANDRA, MUMBAI
ORDER BELOW EXH.01
1. This is an application filed by the applicant for seeking
directions to vacate order of seizure of passport passed by Passport
authority Surat in respect of passport No.Z3691279 belonging to the
applicant.
2. It is contended on behalf of the applicant that his
passport is seized by the passport authority at the instance of
application of the complainant. Various cases are filed u/sec.138 of
Negotiable Instrument Act against him. He has to visit abroad to his
relative. Hence, this application.
3. The opponent No.1 resisted the application vide reply
Exh.8 mainly on the ground of no jurisdiction to direct the Regional
Passport Authority for renewal of passport when the passport is seized
and already impounded.
3. Heard Advocate Milind Gaware for the applicant and
Advocate A.R.Pargaonkar for respondent No.1.
4. On hearing both sides, it is crystal clear that the
passport of the applicant is impounded by the Regional Passport
Authority, Surat in view of various criminal cases against the
applicant. Question crops up whether this criminal court and
particularly special court of cases u/sec.138 of Negotiable Instrument
-- 1 of 2 --
… 2 … C.C.No.33/MISC./2023
Exh.01
Act has a power to direct the Regional Passport Authority for vacating
the order of seizure of passport.
5. So far as the jurisdiction and power of this court are
concerned, this court has no powers to direct the Regional Passport
Officer to vacate the order of impounding of passport of the applicant.
The passport of the applicant is not seized by the order of this court.
Further if the applicant intends to go abroad and the present cases
against him is hurdle for the same, the applicant can file the specific
application for permission to leave India mentioning his places of
abode in abroad, specific period for his residence and date of his
return journey alongwith undertaking to conduct the trial of the case
against him throught his advocate. The application of the applicant is
silent on all this aspects. Therefore, this court do not intends to
invoke the powers of criminal court to direct the Regional Passport
Authority to consider the application of the applicant as per rule and
procedure. The question of jurisdiction is also important. The
jurisdiction to challenge said order of seizure of passport lies with the
appellate authority of Regional Passport authority. The appellate
authority of Regional Passport Officer may consider the application of
the applicant with liberal view considering the aspect of personal
liberty. In the facts and circumstances I have passed following order.
ORDER
1. The application is rejected with the liberty to
prefer the specific application for getting
permission to leave India if necessitated.
2. Order dictated and pronounced in open
court.
Mumbai, (M. P. Saraf)
Dated : 19.06.2023. Metropolitan Magistrate,
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
J.O.Code MH01362
-- 2 of 2 --