Trafficking Of Human Beings Won't Amount To Jeopardising Sovereignty & Integrity Of India: Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that trafficking in human beings doesn't amount to jeopardizing the sovereignty and integrity of India.

The Bench of Justice Sudhir Mittal further observed that it may jeopardize friendly relations of India with a foreign country but it would be so only if there is tangible evidence available to substantiate the allegations.

With this, the High Court quashed the order of the passport authority to impound the passport of a Punjab Police constable on the ground of suspicion that he was involved in the act of trafficking human beings to Europe.

The case in brief 

On May 20, 2017, the Petitioner/Jatinder Singh (Punjab Police Constable) was about to board the flight to London at the International Airport, Amritsar, when his passport was impounded without giving any satisfactory reason.

In the passport office, he was informed orally that the same was done on receipt of orders from the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India. Thereafter, he moved to the High Court challenging the order of the passport authority. High Court ordered that his case be considered afresh by the authority.

Again, an order was passed rejecting his application in view of a letter by the Government of India in the Ministry of External Affairs.

The letter mentioned the receipt of information from unnamed sources that the petitioner could be involved in smuggling illegal immigrants into Europe since 2003 resulting in compromising the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India.

He again moved to the High Court, wherein the Passport authority informed the Court that since he was involved in the trafficking of human beings into Europe, the passport was impounded.

Court's order

At the outset, the Court persued Section 10(3)(c) of the Passport Act which states that the passport authority may impound a passport if it deems it necessary to do so in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of India, friendly relations of India with any foreign country, or in the interests of the general public.

Further, the Court noted that the French Authorities had conveyed to the Indian Embassy that they had received information through an anonymous source, however, the Court further noted that to date, the said source had not been substantiated as no material had been placed on record by way of credible evidence.

The Court was also of the opinion that in the instant case, due process had also not been followed while impounding the passport as it remarked thus:

"Information of the alleged involvement of the petitioner in the trafficking of human beings into Europe was received by the Government of India in October 2016. The petitioner was in India at that time and was working in the police department. Thus, he could easily have been granted an opportunity of hearing before passing an order of impounding the passport. Post decisional hearing, although not called for in the facts and circumstances of this case, has also not been provided."

Consequently, holding that the action had been taken only on the basis of suspicion and the same does not fulfill the requirement of the relevant provision of law, the Court quashed the impugned orders regarding impounding of the passport.

Case title - Jatinder Singh v. Union of India and others [Civil Writ Petition No.35638 of 2019]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 99

Click Here To Read/Download Order