<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (3) TMI 420 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461026</link>
    <description>A bail condition requiring deposit and retention of the applicant&#039;s passport, together with prior permission before leaving India, was treated as onerous because a passport was not an incriminating document in the prosecution case and permanent retention would amount in substance to indirect impounding. The Passports Act, 1967 was treated as the special law governing impounding and retention of passports, so such restriction could not be sustained through a general bail condition under criminal procedure. On the same reasoning applied in an earlier order, the condition was deleted, the order was set aside, the passport was directed to be returned, and advance disclosure of future travel itinerary was required.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Mar 2025 10:32:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=804901" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 420 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461026</link>
      <description>A bail condition requiring deposit and retention of the applicant&#039;s passport, together with prior permission before leaving India, was treated as onerous because a passport was not an incriminating document in the prosecution case and permanent retention would amount in substance to indirect impounding. The Passports Act, 1967 was treated as the special law governing impounding and retention of passports, so such restriction could not be sustained through a general bail condition under criminal procedure. On the same reasoning applied in an earlier order, the condition was deleted, the order was set aside, the passport was directed to be returned, and advance disclosure of future travel itinerary was required.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461026</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>