Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 877 (BOM)

Fida Hussain Yahyabhai Bohra v. State of Maharashtra, through Anti Corruption Bureau/Crime Branch, Amravati

2016-05-05

Z.A.HAQ

body2016
JUDGMENT : Z.A. Haq, J. 1. Heard Shri S.Z. Qazi, advocate for the applicant and Shri K.R. Lule, A.P.P. for the non-applicant. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 3. The applicant has approached this Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, being aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge rejecting the application filed by the applicant seeking permission to leave India for pilgrimage purposes i.e. for performing Hajj and visiting Balalaika. 4. The applicant is being prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477(A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 7, 13(K)(D) I, II, III of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. This Court by the order dated 14th March, 2013 granted bail to the applicant, however, imposed condition that the applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court. As the applicant intends to go for Hajj and to go to Balalaika. The applicant had filed application before the Sessions Court seeking permission for leaving India and seeking his passport which is deposited with the non-applicant. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has rejected this application. 5. The learned advocate for the applicant has pointed out the bereavement made in the application that the applicant is willing to furnish the security as would be directed by this Court and the wife, brother, parents, in-laws and other relatives of the applicant are willing to furnish personal surety for the applicant. The learned A.P.P. has opposed the application on the ground that the offence for which the applicant is being prosecuted is grave and serious. 6. Considering the fact that the non-applicant has not made any complaint of misuse of liberty by the applicant after he is granted bail, in my view, the applicant can be granted permission to leave India for the purposes as stated in the application. Hence, the following order:- (i) The applicant is permitted to leave India and stay out for six months. (ii) The applicant shall furnish his tour programmer to the non-applicant and also file a copy of it along with an affidavit before the Sessions Court. (iii) The applicant shall deposit passport of Master Burundian (son of applicant) with the non-applicant. (iv) The applicant shall also furnish solvent surety in respect of residential house situated at Khayyam, Distt. Buldhana. (ii) The applicant shall furnish his tour programmer to the non-applicant and also file a copy of it along with an affidavit before the Sessions Court. (iii) The applicant shall deposit passport of Master Burundian (son of applicant) with the non-applicant. (iv) The applicant shall also furnish solvent surety in respect of residential house situated at Khayyam, Distt. Buldhana. (v) On compliance with the above directions, the passport of the applicant be returned to him. (vi) The applicant shall re-deposit his passport with the non-applicant after returning back to India. (vii) On re-deposit of the passport by the applicant, the passport of Master Burundian (son of applicant) be returned to him. (viii) Rule is made absolute in the above terms.