Back
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
SYAMAL KANTI CHAKRABARTI, J.
Malcolm War Macleod - Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal – Respondent
Appeal No : C.R.R. 4057 of 2008
Decided On : Sep 09, 2010
PASSPORT ACT, 1967 - SECTION 12(1)(B) - SANCTION FOR PROSECUTION - SPECIAL LAW - OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 12(1)(B) - CANNOT BE TRIED UNDER SECTION 420/468/471 IPC - WANT OF SANCTION - PROCEEDINGS QUASHED.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was charged under Sections 420/468/471 IPC and Section 12 of the Passport Act, 1967 for allegedly tearing pages from his passport containing adverse remarks by the Canadian Embassy refusing him a visa. The petitioner challenged the proceedings on the ground that the investigation and charge sheet were submitted without proper investigation and enquiry and without obtaining the necessary sanction from the Central Government as required under Section 15 of the Passport Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the alleged act of tearing pages from the passport to suppress material information regarding the adverse remark made by the Government of Canada for refusal of a visa constituted an offence under Section 12(1)(b) of the Passport Act, 1967, and not under Sections 420/468/471 IPC. The court further held that since there is a special law to deal with the offence, the general law (IPC) would not apply. Additionally, the court found that the proceedings were initiated without obtaining the previous sanction of the Central Government as required under Section 15 of the Passport Act, which rendered the proceedings void ab initio.
Issues: 1. Whether the alleged act of tearing pages from the passport to suppress material information regarding the adverse remark made by the Government of Canada for refusal of a visa constituted an offence under Section 12(1)(b) of the Passport Act, 1967, or under Sections 420/468/471 IPC. 2. Whether the proceedings were initiated without obtaining the previous sanction of the Central Government as required under Section 15 of the Passport Act.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the alleged act of tearing pages from the passport to suppress material information regarding the adverse remark made by the Government of Canada for refusal of a visa constituted an offence under Section 12(1)(b) of the Passport Act, 1967, and not under Sections 420/468/471 IPC, as the Passport Act is a special law dealing with offences related to passports and travel documents. 2. The court also held that the proceedings were initiated without obtaining the previous sanction of the Central Government as required under Section 15 of the Passport Act, which rendered the proceedings void ab initio.
Final Decision: The court quashed the proceedings arising out of the FIR and discharged the petitioner from his bail bond.
Syamal Kanti Chakrabarti, J.
1. The present revisional application has been filed praying for quashing the proceedings arising out of G. D. reference No. 996 dated 24.06.2010 of N.S.C.B.I. Air Port Police Station, District 24 Parganas (North) under Section 420/468/471/120B of the IPC and Section 12 of The Passports Act, 1967.
2. LEARNED lawyer for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid case was initiated on the basis of a complaint dated 24.06.2008 lodged by Jaydeep Banerjee, S.I. (SCO) before the Inspector-in-Charge N.S.C.B.I. Airport Police Station, District 24 Parganas (North) contending inter alia, that, On 24.06.2008 an Indian national by the name of Malcolm War Macleod (D.O.B. 10.09.1961), S/0: Allan Macleod, of 123/12, N Dam Lane, Laban East Khasi Hills, Meghalaya, Pin: 793 004 and also of Plot No. 9, Near Bethesda Kenches Trace, Shillong, reported to N.S.C.B.I. Airport Immigration (Departure Side), Counter 6 manned by the defacto complainant, to obtain clearance to travel to Bangkok by flight No. TG-134. Scrutiny of his passport revealed that page Nos. 31/32 of his Indian passport No. E2744760/Guwahati/24.09.2002 23.09.2012 was missing. The passenger was, therefore, subjected to interrogation during which he admitted the he had torn off the page 31/32. His intention in doing so, as per the passenger, was to suppress the fact that on that page there were endorsements from the Canadian Embassy refusing him visa, and he was apprehensive that it will prevent him from travelling abroad. When corresponding pages 5/6 of the passport came loose, he admits to having used super glue to stick them back again. On receipt of such complaint investigation was made and charge sheet has been submitted against the petitioner under the aforesaid provisions of the Act.
It is contended by the learned lawyer for the petitioner that without proper investigation and enquiry charge sheet has been submitted arbitrarily against the petitioner being charge sheet no. 33 dated 24.06.2008 which should be quashed.
3. LEARNED lawyer for the petitioner has relied upon a similar case dealt with by this Honble Court in CRR 3495 of 2008 and the principles laid down in 1998 SCC (Cri) 1625 and 1990 C Cr L R (Cal) 1 in support of his contention. On the contrary learned lawyer for the State has opposed the move and claimed that once the Magistrate has taken cognizance the superior Court cannot substitute its own discretion to examine the case on merit whether or not the allegations made in the complaint, if proved, could ultimately end in conviction of the accused. He has further urged that inherent jurisdiction of the Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has to be exercised sparingly and carefully and with caution and only when such exercise is justified by the tests specifically laid down in the Section itself and it is the duty of the Court to see that such instrument is not handed over to an accused to short circuit the prosecution and bring about its sudden death. He has drawn my attention to the principles laid down in 2009 (1) Crimes 216 (SC); 2006 Cri L.J. 3972; 2002 C Cr L R (SC) 332 and (1996) 8 SCC 167 in support of his contention.
4. FROM the contents of the FIR it appears that on 24.06.2008 while the petitioner accused reported to N.S.C.B.I. Air Port Migration (Departure Side) Counter No. 6 to obtain clearance to travel to Bangkok by flight no. TG-314, the security personnel in course of scrutiny of his documents found page no. 31/32 of his Indian Passport missing. On interrogation it transpired to them that intentionally he has torn of the pages which contained endorsement from the Canadian Embassy refusing Visa and he was apprehensive that it will prevent him from travelling abroad.
For the purpose of proper adjudication of the matter the following provisions of Passport Act, 1967 are quoted below: Section 2(b) passport means a passport issued or deemed to have been issued under this Act; Section 2(d) travel document means a travel documen
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
