Renewal of Passport Withheld by Economic Offences Wing: Bombay HC allows NRI to Record Statement Via Video Conferencing [Read Order]

The division bench of Bombay High Court comprising Binu Tamta ( Judicial  Member ) and Hemambika R. Priya ( Technical  Member )  has allowed the Non-Resident Indian (NRI) to record statements via video conferencing before the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) in the case were the renewal of passport was withheld.

Monetary Limits for Filing Income Tax Appeals before HC Enhanced to Rs. 2 Crores: Chhattisgarh HC [Read Order]

The petitioner, an NRI named Gaurav Goenka, has been living in the United Arab Emirates since 2017 and is currently conducting business there. The petitioner has regularly traveled to and from India as part of his work responsibilities and is in possession of a valid Indian passport.

According to the record, the petitioner immediately wrote a letter to the EOW on February 13, 2025, after learning in the United Arab Emirates that his passport was being denied at the EOW's request.

You think you know Labour Laws - but are you sure you're not missing something critical? Click here

In addition to expressing his willingness to have his statement recorded via audio-video technology methods, the petitioner freely offered to assist with the ongoing inquiry. The EOW did not reply to the petitioner's correspondence in spite of this. Without receiving a response, the petitioner was forced to submit a request to the  Special MPID Court, asking for authorization to renew his passport and authorization to use audio-video electronic means to participate in the investigation.

However, on April 9, 2025, an order was issued rejecting the application. The petitioner has been unable to return to India as a result of the EOW's orders to deny the renewal of his passport, which has prevented him from meeting the investigating officer in person. The petitioner now requests this Court's indulgence to allow him to fully assist with the investigation and appear before the investigating officer via audiovisual electronic means.

The petitioner contended that Section 102 of the CrPC permits police to seize property, including documents such as a passport, while conducting an investigation. However, only the authorized passport authority has the jurisdiction to confiscate a passport, according to Section 10(3) of the Passports Act, 1967. Due process must be followed, according to this statutory provision, which includes providing the passport holder with notice and an opportunity for a hearing before taking any such unfavorable action.

You think you know Labour Laws - but are you sure you're not missing something critical? Click here

It was noted that the statutory framework under the CrPC, specifically the proviso to Section 161, and the related provisions under Section 180 of the BNSS specifically acknowledge and permit the use of audiovisual electronic means for witness examination and trial-related procedures.

In order to record his statement for the investigation, the court ordered the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer via audio-video technology means.

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates