Court cannot impound passport in proceeding of false case of cruelty section 498a

My wife has filed a false of cruelty under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The case is still pending and all accused are be on bail. I am a businessman and used to travel abroad for business purposes. I have a serious concern about whether can court impounds passport? Except this, no criminal case is pending.

My wife has filed a false of cruelty under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The case is still pending and all accused are be on bail. I am a businessman and used to travel abroad for business purposes. I have a serious concern about whether can court impounds passport? Except this, no criminal case is pending.

Section 104 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 empowers the court to impound documents, or things produce before it. Additionally, Section 10(3) of The Passports Act, 1967 enables the passport authority to impound or revoke a passport or travel document.

The investigating officer may seize any document in the course of the investigation and produce it before the court. Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure empowers the police officer to seize a document but does not authorize to impound such document.

It is evident from the provision of section 10(3) of The Passports Act, 1967 that only passport authority can impound passport. When police officer seizes a passport, he shall inform the passport authority and request him that impounding of passport is necessary under the provision of section 10(3).

Whenever court satisfies that seized documents should be retained for some time then the cour,t may impound it under section 104 CrPC. If the paper is neither seized nor produced before the court, then the court cannot exercise its power under section 104 CrPC. In your case, the police officer did not seize your passport then how the court can impound it?

In Suresh Nanda v. CBI, (2008) 3 SCC 674; the Supreme Court held that the court could not impound a passport. The court further stated that:

“Impounding of a “passport” is provided for in Section 10(3) of the Passports Act. The Passports Act is a special law while CrPC is a general law. It is well settled that the special law prevails over the general law. Section 104 only enables the court to impound any document or thing other than a passport.”

Therefore, the court cannot impound your passport under section 104 CrPC. In Preeti Gupta v. the State of Jharkhand, (2010) 7 SCC 667; the Supreme Court opined that most of the complaints Section 498-A IPC is false. The ultimate object of justice is to find out the truth and punish the guilty and protect the innocent, but false cases are frustrating this object.

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Advocate

Advocate Shivendra, practicing law since 2005, specializes in criminal and matrimonial cases, extensive litigatin experience before the High Court, Sessions court & Family Court. He established kanoonirai.com in 2014 to provide dependable and pragmatic legal support. Over the years, he has successfully assisted thousands of clients, making the platform a trusted resource for criminal and matrimonial dispute resolution in India.

Related Matters

Husband is demanding DNA test to check the paternity of our son in divorce case

The law does not permit a husband to compel his wife or child to undergo a DNA test merely on the basis of suspicion. In Gautam Kundu v. State of West Bengal (1993) 3 SCC 418, the Supreme Court held that a blood or DNA test cannot be directed as a matter of course. Before seeking such a direction, the husband must establish a strong prima facie case by proving that he had no access to his wife during the period when the child could have been conceived.

क्या चेक बाउंस का केस मियाद समाप्त होने के बाद भी दाखिल हो सकता है

Negotiable Instruments Act के अंतर्गत, वैधानिक अवधि समाप्त होने के बाद भी चेक बाउंस का मामला दायर किया जा सकता है। यदि शिकायतकर्ता देरी का उचित कारण प्रस्तुत करता है, तो न्यायालय विलंब को क्षमा कर शिकायत स्वीकार कर सकता है। नोटिस के बाद निर्धारित समय में भुगतान न होने पर कार्यवाही प्रारंभ की जा सकती है।

Cancellation of bail when accused tempering with witness

Seeking the cancellation of bail is possible when an accused person tampers with witnesses or influences a trial. This guide explains legal grounds for such actions, focusing on mandatory procedures under Section 15-A of the SC/ST Act and post-bail threats. Learn how victims can approach higher courts to ensure a fair trial and protect their rights.

Evidence of interested witness is admissible in criminal proceedings

In criminal law, the testimony of a related witness cannot be discarded solely due to their relationship with the victim. This legal overview clarifies the distinction between related and interested witnesses, citing key Supreme Court rulings. It explains how natural witnesses provide admissible evidence that reliably forms the basis for a conviction, even without independent corroboration.

SDM cannot attach property under section 146 crpc when civil suit is pending

A Sub-Divisional Magistrate cannot legally attach property under Section 146 of the CrPC if a civil suit regarding the same property is already pending. This guide explains why such orders lack jurisdiction and outlines the proper legal remedy, including filing a petition under Section 482 CrPC to the High Court based on established Supreme Court precedents.