File RTI application with passport office as to whether husband passport has been impounded or not as per court orders

2) it appears husband passport has not been impounded till date

Dear Querist

The court has no power to passed an order for impounding the passport but the passport officer have power to passed an order for impounding the passport as per section 10 of Passport Act.

But he has to issue a show cause notice to him and after his reply or lapse the notice time his passport can be impounded otherwise not.

If in your case the court has passed an order for impounding the passport of your husband then it is the duty of passport officer to issue notice to him for this order and impound the passport.

You can contact passport officer of area who issue the passport to him.

Feel Free to Call

1.You may send RTI query to the passport authority to know the compliance of the court order.

2. Since the order is passed the passport authority is bound to impound the same.

3.If it is still not done if you may file writ petition for issuance of mandamus.

Seek the requisite detail by preferring an application under the RTI Act. This application has to be made to the CPIO of the regional passport office from where the passport has been issued to your husband.

If you receive a reply saying that his passport has still not been impounded, file a contempt petition.

Hello,

File an RTI to enquire about the same and if the order has not been complied with then file a petition in the High Court seeking direction that the RPO complies with the judgement within specific time.

Regards

Without knowing the court order it will be difficult to give an opinion about the orders passed by the court to impound passport.

In my opinion the court cannot pass an order to impound passport for such reasons.

Sub-section (3)(e) of Section 10 of the Act provides for impounding of a passport if proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the holder of the passport or travel document are pending before a criminal court in India. Thus, the Passport Authority has the power to impound the passport under the Act. Section 102 of Cr.P.C. gives powers to the police officer to seize any property which may be alleged or suspected to have been stolen or which may be found under circumstances which create suspicion of the commission of any offence. Sub-section (5) of Section 165 of Cr.P.C. provides that the copies of record made under sub-section (1) or sub-section (3) shall forthwith be sent to the nearest Magistrate empowered to take cognizance to the offence whereas Section 104 of Cr.P.C. authorizes the court to impound any document or thing produced before it under the Code. Section 165 of Cr.P.C. does not speak about the passport which has been searched and seized as in the present case. It does not speak about the documents found in search, but copies of the records prepared under sub-section (1) and sub-section (3). Impound means to keep in custody of the law.

The Act being a specific Act whereas Section 104 of Cr.P.C. is a general provision for impounding any document or thing, it shall prevail over that Section in the Cr.P.C. as regards the passport. Thus, by necessary implication, the power of Court to impound any document or thing produced before it would exclude passport.

Section 10A of the Act which provides for an order to suspend with immediate effect any passport or travel document; such other appropriate order which may have the effect of rendering any passport or travel document invalid, for a period not exceeding four weeks, if the Central Government or any designated officer on its satisfaction holds that it is necessary in public interest to do without prejudice to the generality of the provisions contained in Section 10 by approaching the Central Government or any designated officer. Therefore, it appears that the passport of the appellant cannot be impounded except by the Passport Authority in accordance with law.