Return of seized passports permitted with advance intimation safeguards to protect an ongoing investigation.

Passports seized during an ongoing investigation may be returned when there is no allegation of tampering or of any offence relating to the passports themselves, if suitable safeguards can protect the inquiry. The Madras HC treated continued custody as unnecessary where the seizure was only to prevent departure from the country without the investigating agency's knowledge. It accepted the prosecution's safeguard that the petitioners provide advance intimation of departure, destination and expected return date, and directed return of the passports subject to an undertaking by petitioners 1 to 5 to notify the investigating officer before leaving India.

---

---

Issues: Whether the passports seized during investigation could be returned to the petitioners and whether such return could be conditioned on prior intimation to the investigating officer.

Analysis: The petition challenged the order refusing return of passports seized in the course of an ongoing investigation. The Court accepted the position that the passports had not been seized for any offence committed in relation to the passports themselves, but to prevent the petitioners from leaving the country without the knowledge of the investigating agency. Relying on the governing principle that such passports need not remain in custody when suitable safeguards can protect the investigation, the Court found the refusal order unsustainable. It further accepted the safeguard proposed by the prosecution that the petitioners should furnish advance information regarding departure, destination and expected date of return.

Conclusion: The petitioners were entitled to return of their passports, subject to an undertaking by petitioners 1 to 5 to give advance information to the investigating officer before leaving the country.

Ratio Decidendi: Where passports are seized during investigation without any allegation of tampering or offence relating to the passports themselves, the Court may direct their return on protective conditions to ensure that the investigation is not prejudiced.

---