JUDGMENT

Jasgurpreet Singh Puri, J. (Oral)

The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus for issuance of directions to the respondents to release the passport No. P5098135 dated 05.02.2017 to the petitioner as impounded vide seizure memo dated 12.12.2018.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is a case where the petitioner was having a valid passport and on the basis of the aforesaid passport, he was to go to Germany since a child was born to him and his wife was in Germany and he had gone there. On 12.12.2018 he had gone to board a flight and when he was at Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi his passport was confiscated by the airport authorities with the result that he could not even go even though his child was born two days ago. He submitted that the respondent passport authorities have caused serious prejudice to the petitioner when they intimated the airport authorities for seizure of the passport since the exercise of power was not just and proper. He submitted that the petitioner was not intimated with regard to any order of impounding of passport by the passport authorities nor did he receive any notice in this regard and all of a sudden his passport was seized at the airport. He submitted that there was one FIR against the petitioner in which he was convicted in the year 2010 for a period of three years and he had filed a criminal appeal before this Court which is still pending. Learned counsel submitted that in that appeal he had rather filed an application for seeking permission to go abroad and a co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 18.01.2019 in CRM-46034 of 2019 in CRA-S-1722-SB-2010 allowed the application and directed the petitioner to appear before the CJM/Duty Magistrate, Nawanshahar on 21.01.2019 and furnish security to the satisfaction of the Court and the Court was also directed to take heavy security from the applicant-appellant. He submitted that no such application has been filed in terms of the aforesaid order since he was not in the possession of the passport and the passport is being illegally detained by the passport authorities. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the seizure of the passport from the petitioner at the airport was without the authority of law.

3. On the other hand, Mr. Karan Kumar Jund, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents-passport authorities has submitted that the passport of the petitioner had already been impounded by passing an order. He has supplied Photostat copies of notice dated 27.02.2017 and order dated 27.02.2017 vide which the passport of the petitioner was impounded and photocopy of one document by which it can be seen that since there was an FIR pending against the petitioner, his passport was impounded. All the three documents are hereby taken on record as Mark-X, Y and Z respectively. He submitted that since the passport authorities passed an order on 27.02.2017 for impounding the passport of the petitioner, the petitioner instead of submitting and depositing the passport with the passport authorities has tried to travel abroad in December 2018 which was not proper on the part of the petitioner. He submitted that now in case the petitioner makes any application before the learned CJM in terms of the order dated 15.01.2019 passed by this Court vide (Annexure R-2/2) and satisfies the condition of the aforesaid order, the passport shall be returned to the petitioner so