IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** Crl. Misc. No. M-1959 of 2011 Date of Decision:11.02.2011 Baljot Singh Gill .....Petitioner Vs. State U.T., Chandigarh .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present:- Mr. A.D.S. Sukhija, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.K. Khindria, Advocate for U.T., Chandigarh. Mr. Vivek Sethi, Advocate for the complainant. **** DAYA CHAUDHARY, J.(Oral) This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C on behalf of the petitioner- Baljot Singh Gill for issuance of directions to the police not to impound his passport. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an application was moved before the trial Court in this regard and the same has been declined on the ground that the matter is still under investigation and the application is not maintainable. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that it is a case of accident and it is only the passport authority, who can impound the passport and a special Act is there that the police authority has no power to impound the passport. It is also submitted that the petitioner is having immoveable property in India and he is ready to abide any condition to be imposed by the trial Court. He further submits that he will seek prior permission of the Court before leaving India and there is no intention of the petitioner to flee from India and he will join Court Crl. Misc. No. M-1959 of 2011 -2- proceedings whenever necessary. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. In view of the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to move fresh application in this regard before the trial Court. The trial Court is directed to dispose of the application in accordance with law taking into consideration the terms and conditions to be imposed by it. Whether the petitioner is having immoveable property or not may also be ascertained by the trial Court and the passport may be released to the petitioner on furnishing sufficient surety on the basis of immovable property owned by him in India. If any application is filed by the petitioner, the same may be decided after taking into consideration the facts as mentioned above in accordance with law within a period of four weeks thereafter. Disposed of. February 11, 2011 ( DAYA CHAUDHARY ) renu JUDGE