Special CBI Judge Bharat Parashar said that power of the court was sought to be invoked in an arena which the Passports Act does not permit and the accused should have been vigilant enough to challenge the proceedings of seizure of his passport by investigating officer (IO) at an initial stage or at least soon after filing of the charge sheet.
During the arguments on the plea, Jayaswal's counsel had argued that during the course of investigation, CBI had seized the passport and it was informed by the IO later on that his passport was sent to Nagpur's passport officer for the purpose of impounding.
The court, in its order, observed that passport has since been impounded by passport officer after initiating necessary proceedings under the law, thus deciding the issue of legality or seizure of passport by the IO would have effect of circumventing the provisions of the Passports Act, 1967.
Also Read
"Thus, if this court at this stage chooses to go into the said aspect of legality or otherwise of seizure of passport by the IO, then the same will have the effect of nullifying the entire proceedings pending before the Chief Passport Officer which also is a quasi judicial authority," it said.
CBI has chargesheeted Rajya Sabha MP Vijay Darda, his son Devendra Darda, Manoj Jayaswal, Director of Nagpur-based AMR Iron and Steel Pvt Ltd, and the firm as accused in a coalscam case for offences under sections 120-B (criminal conspiracy) read with 420 (cheating) of IPC and under the Prevention of Corruption Act.