Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Nitin Shambhukumar Kasliwal, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction in the nature of mandamus to the Debt Recovery Tribunal-1, Bangalore (DRT) to release his passports bearing numbers Z-2196178 and Z-1742943. The background of the case dates back to 18-11-1999, when the petitioner executed certain guarantee agreements in favor of various lenders. On 20-03-2015, the lenders initiated Original Application No. 711 of 2015 before the DRT seeking repayment of defaulted sums, attachment, and sale of properties of several companies and the petitioner. During the proceedings, the banks filed I.A. No. 1598 of 2015 invoking Section 22(2)(h) read with Section 19(25) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (RDB Act) seeking surrender of the petitioner's passports. The DRT allowed the application and directed the petitioner to surrender his passports. The petitioner complied and surrendered his passports to the DRT. Subsequently, the petitioner sought the return of his passports, but the DRT did not release them. The petitioner then approached the High Court. The legal issues considered were whether the DRT has the power to impound a passport and whether it can retain the passport indefinitely. The petitioner argued that the DRT has no power to impound a passport under the RDB Act and that the right to travel is a fundamental right under Article 21. The respondent, Union of India, submitted that the DRT acted within its powers under Section 22(2)(h) of the RDB Act. The court analyzed the provisions of the RDB Act and the Passports Act, 1967, and held that the DRT does not have the power to impound a passport; such power is exclusively with the Passport Authority under the Passports Act. The court further held that the DRT can only direct surrender of passport as an interim measure to secure the presence of the defendant, but once the purpose is served, the passport must be returned. The court allowed the writ petition and directed the DRT to release the passports to the petitioner within two weeks.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Right to Travel - Passport Retention - Article 21 of the Constitution of India - The right to travel abroad is a fundamental right under Article 21, and passport is a necessary document for exercising that right. The court held that the DRT cannot retain the passport indefinitely after the purpose of surrender is served, as it would infringe upon the petitioner's fundamental right. (Paras 5-7) B) Debt Recovery - Powers of DRT - Passport Impounding - Section 22(2)(h) read with Section 19(25) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 - The DRT has no power to impound a passport under the Act. The power to impound a passport is exclusively with the Passport Authority under the Passports Act, 1967. The court held that the DRT's order directing surrender of passport does not authorize indefinite retention or impounding. (Paras 4-6) C) Debt Recovery - Interim Orders - Passport Surrender - Section 22(2)(h) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 - The DRT can only direct surrender of passport as an interim measure to secure the presence of the defendant, but once the purpose is served, the passport must be returned. The court held that the DRT cannot retain the passport beyond the pendency of the proceedings without specific power. (Paras 5-7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Debt Recovery Tribunal can retain the passport of a petitioner beyond the purpose for which it was surrendered, and whether the Tribunal has the power to impound a passport under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The DRT is directed to release the passports bearing numbers Z-2196178 and Z-1742943 to the petitioner within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
Law Points
- Passport cannot be retained indefinitely by DRT after purpose of surrender is served
- DRT has no power to impound passport under Section 22(2)(h) of RDB Act
- Right to travel is a fundamental right under Article 21
- Passport Act prevails over general provisions of RDB Act
