Point of Law : Article 21 applies when personal liberty of a person is deprived without following the procedure.

ORDER :

The accused, convicted and sentenced for the offences under sections 419, 420, 468 and 471 of IPC, and section 12(1)(b) of the Passports Act, 1967, is the petitioner here.

2. That on 22.1.2009, the Inspector of Sampigehalli Police Station received information that some persons were involved in creation of forged and fabricated passports for the purpose of human trafficking and that they would be approaching the employees of the IBM Company, Manyata Tech Park, Bengaluru, for preparing documents in the name of fictitious names. The Inspector secured two panchas, formed a team consisting of police constables, head constables and Assistant Sub-Inspector and went to that place around 4.00 p.m. As they kept watch, they saw five persons alighting from a red colour Maruti Zen car. A person sitting next to the driver got down from the car and told three other persons in Hindi language to go inside the office of IBM and enquire about the persons who were in need of passports and visas. The police team entertained suspicion, surrounded the car and all those persons and subjected them to search. They could recover a passport bearing number G2999124 from a person called Syed Iqbal. That passport showed that it had been used multiple times for visiting countries viz., Malaysia, Singapore, Canada, China, America, etc. The police team also recovered some other items such as letter heads of various offices, application for issuing tourist visas, blank applications for obtaining visa etc. Seizing all the items, the inspector drew up a mahazar, arrested and brought them to Police Station. Then he gave first information report to the SHO as per Ex.P.1 and took up investigation. During investigation, one of them gave voluntary statement disclosing the involvement of Iqbal Ahmed, i.e., the petitioner herein and then brought the inspector to the house of the petitioner. The petitioner was thus arrested and brought to Police Station at 9.00 p.m. In the presence of the panchas personal search of the petitioner was conducted. The petitioner had with him a passport bearing No.H1924155 and it was seized by drawing a mahazar as per Ex.P.2. The petitioner gave voluntary statement which led to recovery of another passport bearing No.F9608954 that he had kept in his house. In this regard a seizure panchanama was drawn as per Ex.P.6. Thereafter the investigation was handed over to CBI which filed the charge sheet against the petitioner. After trial, the XVII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate: (Special Court for CBI cases): Bengaluru, convicted the petitioner for the offences aforesaid. The petitioner then preferred an appeal to the Court of Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for CBI cases, Bengaluru. By judgment dated 30.04.2014, the Sessions Court dismissed the appeal and thus the petitioner has filed this revision petition.

3. I have heard the arguments of Sri. Hashmath Pasha, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Sri. P.Prasanna Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent. The elaborate submissions made by learned counsel will be referred to later, but Sri Hashmath Pasha mainly raised the following points for being answered :

(i) FIR was not registered soon after receiving information about commission of cognizable offences and therefore entire investigation was vitiated.

(ii) Seizure of the passport Ex.P.5 is not legally proved.

(iii) The prosecution failed to prove that the petitioner used the alleged fake passport, Ex.P5 and thus petitioner’s conviction for this offence under section 12(1)(b) of the Passports Act and other IPC offences does not stand.

(iv) Mere marking of sanction order, Ex.P21, did not amount to its proof, the authority who issued sanction ought to have been examined.

(v) While examining the petitioner under section 313 Cr.P.C., he was not questioned regarding sanction, therefore this part of the evidence is required to be eschewed, and thus the petitioner would be entitled to be acquitted.

(vi) The