S.442 BNSS | Passport Surrender Bail Condition Modifiable Based on Accused's Conduct & Need: Orissa High Court - 2025-05-08

Orissa High Court Allows Modification of Bail Condition, Orders Release of Passport for Accused in CBI Case

Cuttack , Odisha: The Orissa High Court, in a significant ruling, has allowed the modification of a bail condition requiring the surrender of a passport, emphasizing the accused's consistent compliance with previous travel permissions and urgent family needs abroad. Hon'ble Miss Justice SavitriRatho , presiding over the matter, set aside a Sessions Court order and directed the release of petitioner Indrajit De 's passport, subject to certain conditions, until charges are framed in the ongoing CBI case.

The judgment, delivered on May 15, 2025, in CRLREV No. 213 of 2025, addressed the petitioner's challenge to the Sessions Judge's refusal to modify the bail condition originally imposed by the Special C.J.M (CBI), Bhubaneswar.

Case Background

Indrajit De , a director of M/s. EDEN Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd., was implicated in a supplementary chargesheet filed by the CBI in a case involving M/s Tower Infotech Ltd. The allegations pertain to the illegal collection of public deposits and subsequent siphoning of approximately Rs. 2.5 Crores through a fraudulent agreement, with charges under Sections 420, 120B, 34 IPC and Sections 4, 5, & 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act (PCMC Act).

Upon appearing before the trial court on October 9, 2023, Mr. De was granted bail with several conditions, including the surrender of his passport. Subsequently, he was twice granted temporary release of his passport by the High Court to travel to the USA, and he complied by returning and re-depositing the passport on both occasions. His application for a more permanent modification of the passport surrender condition was rejected by the Sessions Judge, Khurda, on April 3, 2025, leading to the present criminal revision petition before the High Court under Section 442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.

Arguments Presented

Petitioner's Submissions (Represented by Senior Advocate Mr. S.K. Padhi):

* The petitioner's family (wife and daughter) resides in the USA, and his wife is ailing, requiring his frequent and sometimes short-notice travel.

* He is a US Green Card holder since 1996 and needs to spend at least six months annually in the USA to maintain this status, facing potential cancellation due to stricter US immigration norms.

* He has meticulously complied with all conditions during previous temporary passport releases.

* The trial is not expected to commence soon as other co-accused are yet to appear.

* He undertook to return within four days if his presence is required by the court.

* Reliance was placed on Suresh Nanda v. CBI regarding the powers of courts to impound passports and Mohammad Hanif Nurani v. The State of Maharashtra where Bombay HC allowed passport release.

CBI's Submissions (Represented by Advocate Mr. Sarthak Nayak):

* The imposition of a passport surrender condition during bail is legal.

* Given the seriousness of the allegations, the petitioner is a "flight risk" and may not return to face trial.

* The trial could be delayed if the petitioner absconds.

* The criminal revision was not maintainable against a bail order.

* Cited Prabal Pratap Singh Yadav v. Republic of India where the Supreme Court itself imposed a condition to surrender the passport.

Court's Reasoning and Application of Legal Principles

Maintainability of the Revision: Justice Ratho found the criminal revision maintainable, clarifying: > "But in this Criminal Revision, the petitioner has not challenged the bail order of the learned trial Court. He had prayed for waiver / modification of one of the bail conditions by filing an application before the learned Sessions Judge Khurda, at Bhubaneswar , which having been rejected, he has filed the Criminal Revisions challenging the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar . So in my considered view, the Criminal Revision is maintainable." The Court also noted its inherent powers under Section 528 of BNSS (Section 482 CrPC).

On Passport Surrender and Impounding: The Court acknowledged the legality of imposing passport surrender as a bail condition but distinguished it from indefinite retention amounting to impounding: > "I find no illegality in the condition to surrender the passport, while granting bail to the petitioner, as it was to prevent him from leaving the country without the knowledge of the trial Court... As he has been permitted to travel abroad on two occasions, it is apparent that his passport has not been retained indefinitely and there will not amount to impounding which can only be done by the passport authorities." The Court referred to Suresh Nanda v. CBI , which held that while police can seize a passport under Section 102 CrPC, only the passport authority can impound it under the Passports Act, 1967.

Assessment of "Flight Risk" and Trial Status : The Court considered the petitioner's consistent past conduct and the current status of the trial: > "So in view of the present status of the trial and the conduct of the petitioner when the passport was released on two earlier occasions, I am satisfied that the petitioner is not a “flight risk” and the passport should be released in his favour by imposing suitable conditions, till the date is fixed for framing of charge." The Court noted that the case was pending for the appearance of other co-accused, diminishing immediate concerns of trial delay due to the petitioner's travel.

Balancing Petitioner's Needs and Prosecution's Concerns: Justice Ratho found merit in the petitioner's submissions regarding his family situation and Green Card requirements, while also appreciating the CBI's apprehension. The decision aimed to strike a balance, ensuring the petitioner's ability to travel while safeguarding the trial's progress.

Final De cision and Directions

The High Court set aside the Sessions Judge's order dated April 3, 2025, and allowed the criminal revision with the following modifications to bail condition (ii):

The petitioner's passport shall be released to him immediately.

Before any international travel, he must furnish his travel itinerary, stay details, active contact numbers, and email address at least four days prior to departure.

He must submit an undertaking to return without fail when the case is posted for framing of charge.

Photostat copies of relevant passport entries must be submitted to the trial court within seven days of his return to India.

The passport must be re-deposited in the trial court when the case (S.P.E No.05 of 2014) is posted for framing of charge.

Once trial starts and charges are framed, any further travel abroad would require a fresh application to the trial court, which will consider it based on his conduct.

This judgment reiterates the judiciary's approach to balancing individual liberties with the interests of justice, particularly in cases involving international travel for accused persons on bail, and underscores that bail conditions are not immutable and can be modified based on evolving circumstances and the conduct of the accused.