/2023 INSC 0645/
NON­REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Criminal Appeal Nos.1601–1602 of 2023
 
Chennupati Kranthi Kumar       … Appellant
versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.          … Respondents
J U D G M E N T
ABHAY S. OKA, J.
1. Though   the   dispute   involved   in   these   appeals   concerns
the return of the passport of the appellant, it is an outcome of
a   matrimonial   dispute   between   the   appellant   and   4 th
respondent   who   is   his   wife.     With   a   view   to   understand   the
controversy,   a   brief   reference   to   factual   aspects   will   be
necessary.
FACTUAL ASPECTS
2. The   appellant   is   accused   no.1   in   a   prosecution   for
offences   punishable   under   Sections   498­A,   403   and   406   of
the   Indian   Penal   Code,   1860   (for   short,   ‘IPC’)   and   Sections   3
and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the 1961
Act’).     During   the   course   of   the   investigation   into   the   said
Criminal Appeal Nos.1601­1602 of 2023 Page  1  of  102023 INSC 645

offences,   the   Police   issued   a   notice   under   Section   91   of   the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘Cr.P.C.’) calling
upon the appellant to produce his passport.   Accordingly, the
appellant   submitted   his   passport   to   the   concerned   police
station,   which   in   turn,   handed   over   the   original   passport   to
the   3 rd
  respondent   –   Regional   Passport   Office   at   Hyderabad.
There   was   a   correspondence   exchanged   between   the   3 rd
respondent   and   the   appellant.     The   3 rd
  respondent   issued   a
letter dated 11 th
 February 2021 informing the appellant to get
permission   from   the   competent   Court   for   the   release   of   his
passport.
3. The   appellant   is   working   in   a   company   in   USA.     He
came   to   India   on   a   leave   to   perform   the   first   death
anniversary   rituals   of   his   father.     While   he   was   in   India,   a
complaint   was   filed   by   the   4 th
  respondent–wife   against   the
appellant   and   other   family   members   for   the   offences
punishable   under   Sections   498­A,   403   and   406   of   IPC   and
Sections   3   and   4   of   the   1961   Act.     Prior   to   that,   on   19 th
January   2021,   the   3 rd
  respondent   issued   a   notice   to   the
appellant, in which it was recorded that the Police authorities
have   forwarded   his   original   passport   to   him.     In   the   same
notice, it was alleged that the appellant was  in  possession of
the passport of 4 th
 respondent.  The appellant was called upon
to return the passport to the 4 th
 respondent.  
Criminal Appeal Nos.1601­1602 of 2023 Page  2  of  10

4. The   appellant   made   an   application   to   the   Court   of   the
learned   II   Additional   Chief   Metropolitan   Magistrate–cum–
Mahila   Magistrate,   Vijayawada   for   issuing   a   direction   to   the
3 rd
  respondent to return the passport.   The appellant pleaded
that he has a fundamental right to travel abroad conferred by
Article 21 of the Constitution of India.   He pointed out in the
application that he needs to go back to USA to attend his job.
The application was opposed by the 4 th
 respondent on various
grounds.     On   14 th
  June   2022,   the   application   was   dismissed
by   the   learned   II   Additional   Chief   Metropolitan   Magistrate­
cum­Mahila   Magistrate.     Being   aggrieved   by   the   said   order,
the   appellant   filed   a   petition   under   Section   482   of   Cr.   P.C
before the High Court.  By the impugned judgment and order,
the High Court of Andhra Pradesh directed the 3 rd
 respondent
to   return   the   passport   of   the   appellant  to   facilitate   his   travel
abroad, subject to the following conditions: 
a. The appellant shall deposit a sum of  ₹ 10 lakhs by
way of a Fixed Deposit Receipt in the name of the
4 th
 respondent; and 
b. The  appellant  shall   submit  the  original  passports
of the 4 th
 respondent and his minor son. 
The appellant was aggrieved by the condition of producing the
passports of his son (who is a citizen of USA) and his wife – 4 th
respondent.   The appellant applied for the modification of the
said order insofar as it directed him to return the passports of
Criminal Appeal Nos.1601­1602 of 2023 Page  3  of  10

his wife and minor son.   The contention of the appellant was
that   the   passport   of   his   son   was   lost   in   July   2021   and   that
the   appellant   has   complied   with   the   necessary   procedure   to
get   a   new   passport   issued.     He   also   contended   that   the
appellant   was   not   in   possession   of   the   passport   of   the   4 th
respondent.     He,   however,   agreed   to   comply   with   the
condition for depositing the sum of  ₹ 10 lakhs by way of Fixed
Deposit Receipt in the name of the 4 th
 respondent–wife.  Even
the said application was rejected by the High Court.  Both the
aforesaid orders have been challenged in these appeals.
SUBMISSIONS
5. The   learned   counsel   appearing   for   the   appellant   relied
upon a decision of this Court in the case of  Suresh Nanda v.
Central   Bureau   of   Investigation 1
  by   submitting   that   there
is no power vesting in the Police to impound a passport.   He
further   submitted   that   the   power   to   impound   passport   vests
only in the Passport Authority under the Passports Act, 1967
(for   short,   ‘the   PP   Act’).     He   submitted   that   in   fact,   the
appellant’s   passport   was   never   impounded   and   therefore,   it
must be returned to him unconditionally. 
6. The   learned   Additional   Solicitor   General   appearing   for
the 3 rd
 respondent – Regional Passport Office submitted that a
duplicate   passport   cannot   be   issued   under   the   provisions   of
the   PP   Act   and   Rules   framed   thereunder.     However,   4 th
1   (2008) 3 SCC 674
Criminal Appeal Nos.1601­1602 of 2023 Page  4  of  10

respondent can apply for the reissue of passport provided she
establishes that her passport has been lost.  On a query made
by   the   Court,   he   accepted   that   there   was   no   order   of
impounding the appellant’s passport made in accordance with
Section 10 (3) of the PP Act. 
7. The   learned   counsel   appearing   for   the   4 th
  respondent   –
wife submitted that the stand taken by the appellant that the
passport   of   the   4 th
  respondent–wife   was   never   with   him   is
completely  false.    Therefore,  the  direction  issued  by  the  High
Court was perfectly justified.   He urged that the rights of the
4 th
  respondent   cannot   be   allowed   to   be   defeated.     He   also
pointed   out   the   conduct   of   the   appellant   which   according   to
him was objectionable.    His  submission  is  that  the  appellant
has indulged in the suppression of facts.
OUR VIEW
8. A relevant decision of this Court on the issue involved is
in   the   case   of   Suresh   Nanda 1
.     In   the   said   decision,   it   was
held   that   the   power   under   Section   104   of   Cr.P.C.   cannot   be
invoked   to   impound   a   passport.     The   reason   is   that   the
provisions of the PP Act which deal with the specific subject of
impounding   passports   shall   prevail   over   Section   104   of
Cr.P.C.   Moreover,   it   was   held   that   under   Section   102   (1)   of
Cr.P.C.,   the   Police   have   the   power   to   seize   the   passport   but
there is no power to impound the same.  It was held that even
if the power of seizure of a passport is exercised under Section
102,   the   Police   cannot   withhold   the   said   document   and   the
Criminal Appeal Nos.1601­1602 of 2023 Page  5  of  10

same   must   be   forwarded   to   the   Passport   Authority.     It   is,
thereafter,   for   the   Passport   Authority   to   decide   whether   the
passport needs to be impounded. 
9. It is an accepted position that the Police took custody of
the   appellant’s   passport   in   the   exercise   of   powers   under
Section   91   of   Cr.P.C.   and   handed   over   the   same   to   the   3 rd
respondent.     Sub­Section   (1)   of   Section   91   of   Cr.P.C.   reads
thus:
“91.   Summons   to   produce   document   or
other thing:­
(1)   Whenever   any   Court   or   any   officer   in
charge of a police station considers that the
production   of   any   document   or   other   thing
is necessary or desirable for the purposes of
any   investigation,   inquiry,   trial   or   other
proceeding   under   this   Code   by   or   before
such Court or officer, such Court may issue
a summons,  or such officer  a written order,
to  the  person in  whose possession  or  power
such   document   or   thing   is   believed   to   be,
requiring him to attend and produce it, or to
produce   it,   at   the   time   and   place   stated   in
the summons or order.
(2) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
(3) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ”
We  fail  to   understand  why   the  passport  of  the  appellant was
required   for   the   purpose   of   the   pending   criminal   case.
Therefore, the exercise of calling upon the appellant to submit
his   passport   was   not   legal.     Thereafter,   the   passport   was
never impounded in exercise of power under Section 10 of the
Criminal Appeal Nos.1601­1602 of 2023 Page  6  of  10

PP Act.  There is nothing on record to show that the passport
was seized under Section 102 of Cr.P.C.  As there was neither
a   seizure   of   the   passport   nor   impounding   thereof,   the
appellant was entitled to return of the passport.
10. Paragraph   13   of   the   impugned   judgment   and   order
reads thus:
“13.   Therefore,   in   the   peculiar   facts   and
circumstances   of   the   case   and   keeping   in
view   the   interest   of   both   the   parties,   this
Court   deems   it   appropriate   to   set   aside   the
Order  under  Revision  and  direct the  release
of   Passport   of   the   petitioner   to   facilitate   his
travel   to   abroad   subject   to   the   condition   of
the   petitioner   depositing   a   sum   of
Rs.10,00,000/­   by   way   of   F.D.R.,   in   favour
of   the   4 th
  respondent/ de   facto   complainant
along with the Original Passports of the 4th
respondent/ de   facto   complainant   and   her
son   before   the   learned   II   Additional   Chief
Metropolitan   Magistrate­cum­Mahila
Magistrate,   Vijayawada,   within   a   period   of
four   (4)   weeks   from   the   date   of   receipt   of   a
copy   of   this   Order.   Further,   the   petitioner
shall   file   an   Undertaking­Affidavit   that   he
would   return   to   India   within   a   period   of   six
months   and   cooperate   for   expeditious
disposal of the above said C.C. In the event,
the   petitioner   fails   to   return   back,   the
F.D.R., shall  stand forfeited in  favour  of the
4 th
 respondent/ de facto  complainant. ”
As   there   was   neither   a   seizure   nor   impounding   of   the
passport,   it   was   unauthorisedly   retained   by   the   3 rd
respondent. In fact, the High Court directed the return of the
passport subject to a deposit of a sum of  ₹ 10 lakhs by way of
Criminal Appeal Nos.1601­1602 of 2023 Page  7  of  10

Fixed   Deposit  Receipt  in  the   name  of  the   4 th
  respondent.    As
the High Court permitted the appellant to  travel abroad,  this
condition   was   imposed   to   ensure   that   the   appellant   comes
back   as   per   his   undertaking   to   attend   the   trial.     But,   the
direction   to   the   appellant   to   return   the   passports   of   the
appellant’s son and wife was not supported by law.  Therefore,
the   High   Court   ought   to   have   directed   the   3 rd
  respondent   to
return the passport.   We may note here that the appellant is
not aggrieved by the direction to make a fixed deposit of   ₹ 10
lakhs.
11. The direction to return the passports of his wife and son
as a condition for the release of the appellant’s passport was
completely   illegal.     As   regards   the   passport   of   the   son,   it   is
taken   care   of   as   the   appellant   has   followed   the   prescribed
procedure  in USA  regarding  lost passports.   The  condition of
returning   the   passport   of   the   4 th
  respondent   could   not   have
been   imposed   at   all   as   the   act   of   the   Passport   Officer   of
retaining   the   appellant’s   passport   was   completely   illegal.
Therefore,   the   said   respondent  can   make   an   application   in   a
prescribed   form   to   the   competent   regional   officer   for   the
reissue   of   the   passport.     If   the   validity   of   the   passport   has
expired   and   the   period   provided   for   renewal   thereof   has
expired,   she   can   apply   for   a   fresh   passport.     If   the   4 th
respondent   wants   some   documents   from   the   appellant   only
for the purposes of filing an application for the reissue of the
passport   or   for   grant   of   a   fresh   passport,   the   appellant   shall
cooperate by doing the needful.
Criminal Appeal Nos.1601­1602 of 2023 Page  8  of  10

12. Accordingly,   the   appeals   succeed   and   we   pass   the
following order: 
a. The   condition   imposed   on   the   appellant   by   the
impugned order of returning the passports of the 4 th
respondent and of the son is set aside;
b. It will be open for the 4 th
 respondent to apply to the
concerned   Regional   Passport   Office   in   prescribed
format for the reissue of her passport or for grant of
a fresh passport.   The concerned Regional Passport
Office   shall   process   the   said   application   on   the
footing   that   her   passport   has   been   lost.     The   4 th
respondent shall not be called upon to produce the
proof   of   loss   of   passport.     Filing   a   report   to   the
Police   about   the   loss   of   the   passport   shall   be
sufficient.     The   application   shall   be   processed   as
expeditiously as possible;
c. The   appellant   shall   render   all   possible   cooperation
to   the   4 th
  respondent   for   getting   the   passport   by
providing   documents,   if   any,   required   as   per   the
Passports Rules, 1980;
d. Rest of the order stands confirmed; and  
Criminal Appeal Nos.1601­1602 of 2023 Page  9  of  10

e. The appeals are partly  allowed on the above terms.
There will be no order as to costs. 
………………………..J.
 (Abhay S. Oka)
………………………..J.
  (Rajesh Bindal)
New Delhi;
July 25, 2023.
Criminal Appeal Nos.1601­1602 of 2023 Page  10  of  10