2011 (9) TMI 727

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... O.R.No.7/2009.   2. The passport of the petitioner was seized by the 2nd respondent - Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Regional Unit, Mangalore when the petitioner arrived on 15.09.2009 to Bajpe International Airport Mangalore from Dubai. The officers of the 2nd respondent seized 9 Kgs. of saffron from the petitioner. The petitioner was arrested on the same day and was produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mangalore.   3. It is the case of the petitioner that he has paid certain sums of money for redemption of the seized goods and the seized goods were released subsequently on 29.04.2010. Thereafter, the petitioner claims to have filed an application before the 2nd respondent to close the prosecution initiated and ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... as there was no order of the passport authorities under Section 10(3)(e) or by the Central Government or by any designated officer under Section 10(A) of the Act to impound the passport.   6. Petitioner's Counsel therefore, submits that the respondents herein are not entitled to keep the passport with them. It is his contention that personal liberty within the meaning of Article 21 includes within its ambit the right to go abroad and consequently no person can be deprived of this right except according to procedure prescribed by law.   7. It is contended by the learned counsel for the respondents that after obtaining necessary sanction, a criminal case is initiated for prosecuting the petitioner and a formal complaint is lodged....