Customs seizure of passport upheld when the document is relevant to proceedings and needed as evidence.

The Kerala HC held that Customs may seize and retain a passport under Section 110(3) of the Customs Act when, in their opinion, it is useful for or relevant to proceedings under that Act. The passport was treated as relevant evidence because it formed the basis of the travel leading to the customs proceedings. Section 14 of the Passports Act was found inapplicable, as it concerns offences or misuse connected with passports and does not displace the Customs Act power to seize a passport for evidentiary purposes. The challenge to the seizure and retention therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Customs authorities were justified in seizing and retaining the appellant's passport under Section 110(3) of the Customs Act instead of invoking Section 14 of the Passports Act.

Analysis: Section 110(3) empowers the proper officer to seize documents or things that, in his opinion, will be useful for or relevant to proceedings under the Customs Act. The passport was treated as relevant because it formed the basis on which the appellant had travelled and the proceedings under the Customs Act had been initiated. Section 14 of the Passports Act was held to be inapplicable because it deals with offences or illegalities connected with the issuance or misuse of passports, not with seizure of a passport as evidence in customs proceedings.

Conclusion: The seizure and retention of the passport under Section 110(3) of the Customs Act was justified, and the challenge to the authorities' action failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a passport is useful or relevant for proceedings under the Customs Act, it may be validly seized and retained under Section 110(3), and the Passports Act does not displace that power.

---