The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has set aside a bail condition requiring an accused to surrender his passport, observing that trial courts do not have the power to impound passports. Justice P. Dhanabal held that the Passports Act is a special law that prevails over general laws like the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) or Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and therefore, only passport authorities are empowered to impound such documents.
Background of the Case
The petitioner, Raja, was booked by the Srirangam All Women Police Station (Crime No. 32 of 2025) for alleged offences under Sections 294(b), 417, and 506(i) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). He was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on December 23, 2025.
On January 10, 2026, the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchirapalli, granted him bail. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a modification petition (Crl.M.P.No.613 of 2026). On February 11, 2026, the Sessions Court modified the conditions, requiring the petitioner:
- Not to leave India without prior permission from the concerned Court.
- To surrender his passport to the jurisdictional Magistrate Court.
- To appear and sign before the respondent police station weekly on Mondays at 10.00 a.m.
The petitioner moved the High Court seeking to set aside these conditions, specifically challenging the requirement to surrender the passport as being in violation of Article 21 of the Constitution.
Arguments of the Parties
The counsel for the petitioner argued that the condition to surrender the passport exceeded the limits of the Sessions Court’s authority. It was contended that under the Passports Act, the competent authority to impound a passport is the passport office, not the trial court. The petitioner further relied on Section 109 of the BNSS to argue that the Court’s power to impound documents does not extend to passports.
The Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent opposed the petition. He submitted that considering the gravity of the offence, the Sessions Court had directed the surrender of the passport to secure the presence of the petitioner and prevent him from fleeing.
Court’s Analysis and Observations
The Court examined the interplay between general criminal procedure and the special provisions of the Passports Act. Citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Suresh Nanda vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (2008) 2 SCC (Cri.) 121, the Court observed that while Section 104 of the Cr.P.C. (equivalent to provisions in BNSS) allows a court to impound any document produced before it, this power excludes passports.
The Court noted:
“In our opinion, this provision will only enable the Court to impound any document or thing other than a passport. This is because impounding a passport is provided for in Section 10(3) of the Passports Act. The Passports Act is a special law while the Cr.P.C. is a general law.”
Justice Dhanabal further emphasized:
“It is well settled that the special law prevails over the general law. So far as passport is concerned the passport authorities alone can impound passport and the trial Court while granting bail cannot impose such a condition to deposit the passport. If at all the Court wants to impound passport the same can be done through the concerned authorities.”
Decision
The High Court partly allowed the petition. It set aside “Condition No. 2” imposed by the Sessions Court, which directed the petitioner to surrender his passport to the jurisdictional Magistrate Court. The Court ordered that all other conditions, including the restriction on leaving India without permission and the weekly signing requirement, shall remain intact.
Case Details Block
- Case Title: Raja vs. The Inspector of Police
- Case No.: CRL OP(MD). No. 6022 of 2026
- Bench: Justice P. Dhanabal
- Date: 06.04.2026
