Karnataka High Court
Sri Mohammad Nasir vs The State Of Karnataka on 26 June, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:22445
CRL.P No. 4349 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4349 OF 2023
(482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
SRI MOHAMMAD NASIR
S/O ABBAS B,
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
RESIDING AT TALAGUR VILLAGE,
BALUR HOBLI, MUDIGERE TALUK,
CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SRIKANTH B, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
signed by BY BALUR POLICE STATION
REKHA R
REP/BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Location:
High Court BANGALORE-01
of
Karnataka
2. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER
BANGALORE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE,
80 FEET ROAD, 8TH BLOCK,
KORMANGALA, BANGALORE-560096
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.VINAY MAHADEVAIAH, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI.SHANTHI BHUSHAN, DSGI FOR R2)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC BY THE ADVOCATE
FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:22445
CRL.P No. 4349 of 2023
HC-KAR
ORDER DATED 16.04.2021 PASSED ON THE APPLICATION
FILED BY THE PETITIONER IS S.C.NO.11/2021, BY THE PRL.
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKMAGALUR VIDE
ANNEUXRE-K.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MS JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI
ORAL ORDER
Petitioner who is a arraigned as accused No.3 has
filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, with a
prayer to set aside the order dated 06.03.2021 passed by
the trial Court in SC.No.11/2021, rejecting his prayer for
an order not to obstruct him from moving to Dubai.
2. In support of the petition, the petitioner has
contended that his sister has filed a complaint against one
Abdul Raheem, based on which case was registered in
Cr.No.26/2019 and after conducting investigation charge
sheet is filed in SC.No.11/2021, for the offences punishable
under Sections 323, 324, 354, 427, 448, 504 and 506 of IPC
against the said Abdul Raheem.
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:22445
CRL.P No. 4349 of 2023
HC-KAR
2.1 As a counter blast, Abdul Raheem filed a
complaint in Cr.No.25/2019 against the petitioner and
others for the offences punishable under Sections 143,
147, 148, 341, 307 r/w Section 149 of I.P.C and after
conducting investigation, charge sheet is filed. In the said
case, Petitioner has secured bail.
3. On 09.02.2021, while petitioner was traveling to
Dubai, at Mangaluru Airport, he was stopped on the ground
that a look-out notice is issued by the immigrant
authorities. Therefore, he filed application with a prayer not
to obstruct his travel to Dubai. The prosecution has filed
objections stating that petitioner may not come back to
India and thereby protract the proceedings. The Sessions
Court rejected his application and ordered for keeping the
passport of the petitioner in safe custody, with a direction
that he shall not leave India without permission of the
Court.
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:22445
CRL.P No. 4349 of 2023
HC-KAR
4. After securing bail, the petitioner has complied
with all the conditions. Without there being any
apprehension of petitioner absconding, look-out notice is
issued and the Airport authorities have seized the passport
of the petitioner. The brother of the petitioner is residing at
Dubai and suffering from ill health. Petitioner always used to
travel to Dubai. In the above facts and circumstances, it is
necessary for him to visit Dubai. He is ready to abide by any
conditions that may be imposed and hence, the petition.
5. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for
petitioner has relied upon decision in Sri Praveen Surendiran
vs State of Karnataka and Anr. (Praveen Surendiran)1
6. Sri.Shanthi Bhushan H, learned Deputy Solicitor
General of India representing respondent No.2, Regional
Passport Officer, fairly submitted that as per the decision of
Hon’ble Supreme Court, the passport cannot be impounded
by the investigation officer or Court. The look-out notice is
1
Crl.P.No.1892/2022 dated 21.03.2022.
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC:22445
CRL.P No. 4349 of 2023
HC-KAR
no longer pending. The passport appears to have expired
and it is required to be get renewed by the petitioner. While
releasing the passport, condition may be imposed that if
petitioner physically fails to appear before the Court,
consistently for more than three hearing dates, his passport
may be impounded leading to the consequences.
7. Heard arguments and perused the record.
8. Thus, in the light of pendency of case and crime
No.25/2019, and the look-out notice, when petitioner tried
to travel to Dubai, at Mangaluru Airport, he was stopped
and his passport was seized and produced before the trial
Court. Since a criminal case is pending against the
petitioner, the trial Court has refused to release the
passport on the ground that if petitioner leaves the
country, he may not return to answer the charges.
-6-
NC: 2025:KHC:22445
CRL.P No. 4349 of 2023
HC-KAR
9. In Suresh Nanda Vs CBI (Suresh Nanda)2 of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court, held that as per Section 10 of the
Passport Act, it is only the passport authority which is
having jurisdiction to impound a passport and neither the
investigating officer nor the Court is having any powers to
impound or retain a passport. While releasing the passport,
the trial Court may impose condition that, if the petitioner
fails to appear before the Court for any specific hearing
dates, then the investigating officer is at liberty to move
the passport authorities for impounding the passport and
also for issue of look-out notice. Relying upon this decision,
the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.1892/2022,
also directed the trial Court to handover the passport to the
petitioner therein. Of course, if the petitioner violates any
of bail conditions, the trial Court is at liberty to cancel his
bail also. However, apprehending that the petitioner may
not return to India, the trial Court cannot refuse handing
over of the passport. In the result, the petition succeeds
and accordingly the following:
2
(2008) 3 SCC 674
-7-
NC: 2025:KHC:22445
CRL.P No. 4349 of 2023HC-KAR
ORDER
(i) Petition filed by the petitioner/accused No.3
under Section 482 of Cr.P.C is allowed.
(ii) The trial Court is directed to handover
passport to the petition/accused No.3
within a period of two weeks from the date
of receipt of copy of this order.
(iii) However, it is open to the respondent
No.1- Police to approach the passport
authorities under Section 10 of the
Passport Act, for impounding the passport
of the petitioner in accordance with law,
after providing reasonable opportunity for
him.
(iv) The Registry is directed to send a copy of
this order to the trial court through e-mail.
Sd/-
(J.M.KHAZI)
JUDGE
RR / List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46