Passport seizure under foreign exchange law may be justified where it is relevant to adjudication of alleged contravention.

Section 38 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 permits seizure of any document or thing relevant to an investigation or proceeding where the authorised officer has reason to believe it is useful for that purpose. On that footing, a passport may be treated as relevant if it can show foreign nationality, residence in India, or entry into India on a foreign passport, because those facts may bear on alleged contravention of section 29(1)(a). The text also raises the separate concern that seizure of a passport should not continue indefinitely and that safeguards are needed to avoid unreasonable deprivation, but no further operative direction is available in the supplied extract.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a passport could be seized under section 38 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 as a document or thing relevant to adjudication proceedings for alleged contravention of section 29(1)(a); (ii) whether such seizure could continue indefinitely and, if not, what directions were to prevent unreasonable deprivation of the passport.

Issue (i): Whether a passport could be seized under section 38 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 as a document or thing relevant to adjudication proceedings for alleged contravention of section 29(1)(a).

Analysis: Section 38 authorises seizure of any document or thing useful for, or relevant to, an investigation or proceeding under the Act where the authorised officer has reason to believe such relevance exists. The passport was treated as relevant because it could evidence the petitioner's status as a foreign national residing in India and the fact of entry into India on a foreign passport, both of which bore on the alleged breach of section 29(1)(a). The absence of the exact words

---