The Gujarat High Court granted bail to a man who was accused of illegally obtaining an Indian passport despite allegations that his parents were Bangladeshi nationals, observing that the petitioner had prima facie established his citizenship based on the passport issued to him by a competent authority. The Court noted that the crux of the allegation against the petitioner was that he was not an Indian citizen, and that although his parents were claimed to be Bangladeshi nationals, the petitioner held a genuine Indian passport. The passport itself had been seized by the police in connection with the case but was not alleged to be forged. The petitioner was booked in an FIR under multiple provisions including cheating by personation, forgery, forgery of a valuable security, forgery for the purpose of cheating, and use of forged documents or electronic records as genuine, as well as offences under the Passport Act, after the charge-sheet was filed by authorities.
In seeking regular bail, the petitioner submitted that the documents he had filed, including his Indian passport and supporting identity papers, established prima facie that he was an Indian citizen and had the right to hold the passport issued by the competent authority. The High Court took note that he had been in custody since May of the previous year and that the question of his citizenship was at the heart of the allegations. The Court observed that on a prima facie assessment of the material available, there were documents indicating that the petitioner’s identity and citizenship had been recognised by the competent authority at the time of issuing the passport.
The Court balanced the facts of the case against the circumstances of prolonged custody, observing that without clarity on whether the petitioner was indeed a non-citizen, continued detention was not necessary. It was for this reason that the High Court granted bail, concluding that since the passport had been issued by a competent authority and there was no indication at that stage of trial that it was forged, the petitioner had prima facie established his identity as an Indian citizen. The Court found that litigating the issue of citizenship and legality of passport issuance would be better undertaken during the trial process rather than by keeping the petitioner in custody while his identity remained unresolved.
In its order, the High Court emphasised that the fact of possession of a passport and documentation establishing citizenship prima facie entitled the petitioner to be released on bail, particularly given his extended period of custody. The Court did not conclude on the ultimate merits of the allegations regarding citizenship but held that the initial evidence suggested that he had established prima facie that he was a citizen of India and was lawfully issued a passport. On this basis, the Court concluded that there was no requirement to keep the petitioner in custody any further, and accordingly regular bail was granted.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.