Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1866 (GUJ)

Kishore Kumar B. Purohit v. State of Gujarat

2016-09-01

S.G.SHAH

body2016
ORDER : S.G SHAH, J. Rule. Service of rule is waived by Mr. K. P. Raval, APP for respondent no. 1 and Mr. R. C. Kodekar, Ld. Counsel for respondent no. 2. 2. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record. 3. The applicant-original accused No. 2 is a convict in Special Case No. 40 of 2000 in respect of offence connected with bank loan transaction. His appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 1662 of 2009 is pending before this Court having been admitted on 16th September, 2009. As per the order dated 29th September, 2009, the applicant is on bail. 4. The present application is filed whereby the applicant is seeking release of his passport bearing No. Z-3042400 and to allow him to visit Dubai for the period from 5th September, 2016 to 10th September, 2016and to Netherland for the period from 19th October 2016 to 30th October 2016 and then Dubai from 4th March 2017 to 10th March 2017. It is the case of the applicant that he is in business of manufacturing Aluminum Wire Rod and exports and supplies the said goods to various countries for steel plants of company. The applicant stated that he is Director of M/s. Sai Flipped Coil Limited and he obtained degree of Doctorate in Marketing Management in the year 2005-2006. 5. Learned advocate for the applicant, on the basis of above facts, submitted that for the aforesaid purpose, the applicant intends to go to Dubai and Netherlands and for that purpose, necessary permissions are required from this Court. He submitted that in past also on several occasions, the applicant was permitted by Special Court, CBI as well as by this Court to visit the foreign country. He invited attention of the Court to the averments in that regard in the present application and the details mentioned about orders of the courts permitting the applicant to visit the foreign country. From the details given in paragraph 6 of the application, it could be seen that between 29/02/2008 to 13/03/2016, the applicant was permitted as many as 18 times either by Special Court, CBI or by this Court to travel the foreign country. It was stated that the applicant visited Dubai on last occasion pursuant to order dated 22th March, 2016 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Application No. 6426 of 2016. It was stated that the applicant visited Dubai on last occasion pursuant to order dated 22th March, 2016 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Application No. 6426 of 2016. It was submitted further that the applicant is physically challenged person having suffered injury in a car accident which took place in 2002. 6. It appears that passport bearing No. Z-3042400 is valid upto 15th December, 2017. Previously, the passport was handed over to the applicant as per order dated 18th November, 2014 passed by this Court in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 18296 of 2014 for the purpose of renewal. At present, the passport is with respondent No. 2-CBI. 7. From the above facts, it is clear that on sixteen occasions, the applicant has gone to foreign country upon being permitted by this Court. This time also, he wants to visit Dubai and Netherlands for the aforesaid purpose. The track record of the applicant shown from the above facts, is dependable. On all the occasions, when the applicant was permitted to go to foreign country, he has returned back in time and complied with the conditions. 8. It cannot be gainsaid that once the appeal is admitted and the applicant has been released on bail, liberty to travel abroad cannot be curtailed except in exceptional circumstances. Learned advocate for respondent No. 2 could, not point out any exceptional circumstances, which may persuade the Court against granting of the prayer. 9. The applicant has given itinerary giving the details of schedule of proposed visit Dubai for the period from 5th September, 2016 to 10thSeptember, 2016 and to Netherland for the period from 19th October 2016 to 30th October 2016 and then Dubai from 4th March 2017 to 10thMarch 2017 as prayed for. In the aforesaid circumstances, the request could be favourably considered. 10. Since the passport is with respondent No. 2 - CBI, while granting prayer to the applicant to travel as prayed for by him for visiting Dubai for the period from 5th September, 2016 to 10th September, 2016 and to Netherland for the period from 19th October 2016 to 30th October 2016and then Dubai from 4th March 2017 to 10th March 2017, CBI is directed to release the passport of the applicant bearing No. Z-3042400 forthwith. The applicant shall comply with the following conditions for enjoying liberty to travel abroad, as aforesaid, i. The applicant shall deposit an amount of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with the Registry of this Court before leaving the country; (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking on oath in this Court on or before 3rd September 2016 to the effect that: (a) he will be visiting Dubai for the period from 5th September, 2016to 10th September, 2016 and to Netherland for the period from 19th October 2016 to 30th October 2016 and then Dubai from 4th March 2017 to 10th March 2017. (b) he shall return to India, and on returning every time after every trip as aforesaid, he shall surrender his passport back to the Authority of respondent No. 2 within a week; (c) he shall inform the respondent No. 2 as well as this Court about his arrival in India within one week from the date of his return; (iii) In the above-said affidavit/undertaking, the applicant shall mention itinerary and the programme including cities/places to be visited with telephone numbers; the applicant shall disclose and state place and address of his stay in Dubai and Netherlands for the aforesaid period. 11. The applicant was permitted to travel as per order dated 5/5/2015 and, therefore, he has also deposited Rs. 50,000/-. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that such amount of Rs. 50,000/- is lying with the Registry of this Court. If it is so, the same amount is to be considered as deposit towards compliance of this order. 12. In view of this order, the condition imposed on the applicant by this Court in the order dated 29th September, 2009 regarding surrender of passport would stand suspended for the aforesaid period of applicant's visit to aforementioned foreign countries. 13. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct Service TODAY is permitted.