The Delhi High Court on Wednesday ordered restoration of the passport of former Indian Premier League (IPL) commissioner Lalit Kumar Modi, paving the way for his return to the country.
A bench of justices Badar Durrez Ahmed and Vibhu Bakhru set aside the order revoking Modi’s passport but made it clear that it was not expressing any opinion with regard to the alleged violations under the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) by him which are being examined separately by the authorities under FEMA.
Restoring his passport, the bench said the materials taken into consideration while revoking his passport were ‘extraneous and irrelevant’.
Further, the bench said the order revoking Modi’s passport was invalid as it was in violation of Article 19(1)(a) (freedom of speech and expression) and (g) (practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business) of the Constitution.
The bench also said there is a specific procedure and statutory provisions for default or non-compliance of summonses under FEMA and revocation of his passport for such default on the ground that it was in the interest of general public ‘was not lawful’.
‘... extraneous considerations and irrelevant materials were taken into account by the officers under the Passports Act while rendering their decisions dated March 3, 2011 and October 31, 2011.
‘This is also apart from the more serious issue of invalidity on account of violation of Article 19(1)(a) and (g). The Single Judge, in the impugned order dated January 16, 2013, in our view, did not examine these aspects of the matter.
A bench of justices Badar Durrez Ahmed and Vibhu Bakhru set aside the order revoking Modi’s passport but made it clear that it was not expressing any opinion with regard to the alleged violations under the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) by him which are being examined separately by the authorities under FEMA.
Restoring his passport, the bench said the materials taken into consideration while revoking his passport were ‘extraneous and irrelevant’.
Further, the bench said the order revoking Modi’s passport was invalid as it was in violation of Article 19(1)(a) (freedom of speech and expression) and (g) (practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business) of the Constitution.
The bench also said there is a specific procedure and statutory provisions for default or non-compliance of summonses under FEMA and revocation of his passport for such default on the ground that it was in the interest of general public ‘was not lawful’.
‘... extraneous considerations and irrelevant materials were taken into account by the officers under the Passports Act while rendering their decisions dated March 3, 2011 and October 31, 2011.
‘This is also apart from the more serious issue of invalidity on account of violation of Article 19(1)(a) and (g). The Single Judge, in the impugned order dated January 16, 2013, in our view, did not examine these aspects of the matter.