1985 P Cr (PLP)

"

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) ................................................... (b) ......................................................... (c) .......................................................... (d) ........................................................ (e) .......................................................... (f) ......................................................... (g) is in wrongful possession of the passport not lawfully issued to him or allows his passport to be used by another person. (h) ......................................................... (i) .......................................................... (j) ........................................................ " 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. 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. In support of his arguments, the learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance on Pervaiz Ahmed Butt v. The State P L D 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." 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. For the foregoing reasons the application was allowed and the proceedings pending against the applicant were quashed by short order, dated 5‑5‑1985. S.G.D. Proceedings quashed.