1. ' This is an application under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. By which the applicant Sher Muhammad Raees has sought quashment of the proceedings under section 6(1)(g), Passport Act, 1974 pending against him in the Court of A.C.M.X. (FIA), Karachi, South.
2. ' The facts of the case, in brief, are that on 7-9-1982 S.I. Masood Ali, F.I.A. Passport Cell, Karachi under the instructions of the Inspector of the said cell arranged a raid and searched the premises of Messrs. Huma Travels. The applicant who is the proprietor of the said Travel Agency was present at the time of the search. In course of the search 23 Pakistani Passports, six Irani Passports and some Air Tickets were recovered from the drawer of the Office table. The details of the articles recovered during the search are specified in the F.I.R. As the applicant could not give satisfactory account as to possession of the recovered articles, the police after observing necessary formalities, challaned him under section 6(1)(g) of Passport Act, 1974.
3. ' It was contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the facts mentioned in the F.I.R.
4. Which is the foundation of the prosecution case do not constitute any offence and as such the proceedings in the lower Court based on such facts are nothing but an abuse of process of law and are, therefore, liable to be quashed. He further submitted that the applicant assured the aforementioned Sub-Inspector that he was in possession of authority letters of the passport holders whose passports were secured by him as the same were given to him for the purpose of getting the passport holders' tickets through Messrs Pak Travel Agency, the licensed travel agents and tour operators. Another argument of the learned counsel was that the order passed by the learned A.C.M. (F.I.A.) Karachi, South dated 27-11-1982 whereby he dismissed the application moved by the applicant under section 249-A, Cr.P.C. Was wrong as he has given no reason for summarily dismissing the application.
5. ' A careful perusal of the F.I.R. Shows that certain passports belonging to certain persons were recovered from the possession of the applicant who could not give satisfactory explanation as to the possession of the said passports. There is no indication on the record that the passports in question were stolen or were forged or applicant possessed the same for some ulterior purpose. In absence of such material, the learned State counsel was asked to point out the provision of law under which mere possession of the passports belonging to some other persons was an offence.
6. He was however unable to lay hands on any such provision excepting section 6(1)(g) of Passport Act, 1974 where under the applicant is facing trial in the lower Court. It reads as under:- "6. Penalties for certain offences relating to Passport Act.--(1) A person shall be punished for imprisonment which may extend to three years or with fine or with both, if he -- (a)
7. (b)
8. (c)
9. (d)
10. (e)
11. (f)
(g) is in wrongful possession of the passport not lawfully issued to him or allows his passport to be used by another person.
12. (h)
13. (i)
14. (j)
15. It appears from clause (g) referred to above, that if a person is found in possession of a passport which has not been lawfully issued to him, he will be liable to punishment for such wrongful possession of the passport. ' In other words possession of unauthorised passports which are not issued by competent authority is an offence punishable under aforementioned provision of law.
16. But that is not the case here. The passports allegedly recovered from the possession of the applicant are admittedly in the names of different persons. It is not the prosecution case that the recovered passports have not been lawfully issued by the competent authority. Learned counsel for the state is constrained to concede that mere possession of passports belonging to other person is not an offence. Accordingly no offence is made out against the accused/ applicant.
17. ' In support of his arguments, the learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance on Pervaiz Ahmed Butt v. The State PLD 1978 Lah. 405 wherein it was held as under:- "The first part of this clause contemplates two things, firstly wrongful possession of a passport by a person and secondly such passport not lawfully issued to him. This shows that the possession of such passport by that person should be wrongful and further the said passport is not lawfully issued to him. In order to bring the case within the mischief of this passport of this clause, both possession as well as issuance of a passport must be illegal. According to the counsel for the State, whatever the purpose, a mere possession of another person's passport will be hit by the first part of this clause. The Investigating Officer, who was personally present before this Court, also advanced similar argument that no one can keep or possess the passport of another person and if he does so, he will make himself liable for punishment under this clause. I am not inclined to agree with this interpretation suggested on behalf of the State. If a mere possession of another person's passport is to be considered illegal, it will result in great hardship creating serious trouble even for innocent and bona fide persons keeping in possession another person's passport in good faith."
18. ' I am in respectful agreement with the views expressed in the above reported case. It is not contemplated by clause (g) of subsection (1) of section 6 of the above Act that mere possession of a passport belonging to other person, even though innocently, will be punishable as an offence. In order to bring the case within the mischief of above provisions, it has to be established further that the possession of any passport is wrongful. That is to say the passports recovered from any body's possession are fake as they are not issued by the authority competent to issue them. Admittedly there is no material to warrant such conclusion.
19. ' For the foregoing reasons the application was allowed and the proceedings pending against the applicant were quashed by short order, dated 5-5-1985.