JUDGMENT : A.S. Gadkari, J. 1. This interim Application is taken up for hearing, in pursuance of Order dated 13th July, 2020 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 3034 of 2020 and the Administrative Order dated 16th July, 2020, passed by the Hon'ble, the Chief Justice in furtherance thereof. 2. Heard Mr. Jha, learned Advocate for the Applicant and Mr. Gavand, learned APP for the State, through Video Conferencing. Perused the entire record annexed to the Application and additional documents produced by way of compilations by the respective counsel. 3. This is an Application for modification of Order dated 19th May, 2020 to the limited extent and permitting the Applicant to travel to United States of America for a period of 8 weeks from 25th July, 2020 to 6th September, 2020. These dates of travel from 25th July, 2020 to 6th September, 2020 have been incorporated in the present Application by way of an amendment in pursuance of Order dated 19th July, 2020. The other prayer which is sought by the Applicant, is for direction to the Respondent Investigating Agency to handover the passport of the Applicant. 4. The present Application was initially listed for hearing on 17th July, 2020. At the oral request of the learned counsel for the Applicant, leave was granted to amend the Application and to file an additional Affidavit, placing on record subsequent events and necessary correspondence on which the learned counsel for the Applicant places reliance. The learned APP was also directed to file a brief reply to the Application and to the additional Affidavit filed by the Applicant. The matter was thereafter adjourned to 22nd July, 2020 for hearing. The parties herein have completed pleadings i.e. filing additional affidavit and affidavit-in-reply by the Investigating Agency. 5. The present Application was thereafter scheduled for hearing on 22nd July, 2020. During the course of arguments, this Court put certain queries to the learned counsel for the Applicant. The learned counsel for the Applicant sought time to take instructions from his client and he also raised some objections with respect to the Affidavit-in-reply filed by the Police Officer of the Investigating Agency. This Court, therefore, issued directions to both the parties and the present Application was thereafter adjourned today for further hearing. 6. The learned counsel for the Applicant sought time to take instructions from his client and he also raised some objections with respect to the Affidavit-in-reply filed by the Police Officer of the Investigating Agency. This Court, therefore, issued directions to both the parties and the present Application was thereafter adjourned today for further hearing. 6. The Applicant is an accused in CR No. I-156 of 2014 registered with Kapurbawadi Police Station, Thane for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 470, 471, 474 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per the submission of the learned counsel for the Applicant, the Applicant had arrived in India on 10th January, 2020 and the Applicant was arrested by the concerned police on 21st February, 2020 at the time of his departure to United States of America at the Mumbai Airport, in pursuance of a Look Out Notice issued in that behalf. The Applicant thereafter filed an Application for bail bearing No. 609 of 2020 before the learned District Judge-2 and Additional Sessions Judge, Thane. The Trial Court, by its Order passed below Exh.-1, dated 4th May, 2020, was pleased to reject the said Application. 7. The Applicant thereafter preferred Bail Application No. 24 of 2020 in this Court. The said bail Application initially came up for hearing on 15th May, 2020 before the co-ordinate Bench (Coram:-Smt. Sadhana S. Jadhav, J.). This Court in paragraph No. 4 of the Order dated 15th May, 2020, recorded the submissions of the learned counsel for the Applicant, which are reproduced below for the sake of convenience. "4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the event of being released on bail, the applicant would be residing on the address mentioned in the cause title and it is also submitted that the said flat belongs to his uncle Ramzan Ali Bimani. The learned counsel submits that he would file an affidavit of the uncle of the applicant. The applicant would continue to stay at the place till the conclusion of his trial and would submit his passport to the Court. Stand over to 19th May 2020. The learned counsel submits that he would file affidavit of the uncle of the applicant before the next date. Copy of the affidavit shall also be submitted to the Kapurbawadi Police Station. Stand over to 19th May 2020." 8. Mr. Stand over to 19th May 2020. The learned counsel submits that he would file affidavit of the uncle of the applicant before the next date. Copy of the affidavit shall also be submitted to the Kapurbawadi Police Station. Stand over to 19th May 2020." 8. Mr. Ramzanali Ibrahim Bhimani, accordingly filed an Affidavit dated 16th May, 2020. The Bail Application was thereafter taken up for hearing on 19th May, 2020. This Court by its Order dated 19th May, 2020 granted temporary bail to the Applicant for a period of 8 weeks. The operative part of the said Order reads as under:- "5] Hence, following Order:- (a) The applicant be released on temporary bail for a period of eight weeks in C.R. No. I-156 of 2014 registered with Kapurbawadi Police Station, Thane on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one or more sureties to make up the amount. (b) Till the procedure for furnishing sureties is completed, the applicant is permitted to furnish cash bail. (c) Before his actual release from jail, the Applicant is directed to surrender his Passport and/or Green Card issued by the United States of America with the Investigating Agency, if not earlier seized by it or other Government Authorities. (d) After his release from jail, the applicant is directed not to leave jurisdiction of Thane Police Commissionerate without prior permission of the trial Court. (e) Place the Application for regular bail before the regular Court after normal functioning of the Court begins." 9. The Applicant was released from jail on 20th May, 2020. The present Application was thereafter filed on 10th June, 2020 for the afore-stated reliefs noted in paragraph No. 3 above. 10. Mr. Jha, learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that, the Applicant migrated to United States of America in the year 1985. The Applicant is settled in the city of Texas in United States and carries on a business of Event Management Company namely "Events Tonight". He submitted that, the Applicant has been issued Green Card by the United States Administration on 26th July, 2010. That, in last about 35 years, not a single criminal case in the United States is registered against the Applicant. The Applicant arrived in India on 10th January, 2020 and while returning to the United States on 21st February, 2020, he was arrested at Mumbai Airport as Look Out Notice was issued against him. That, in last about 35 years, not a single criminal case in the United States is registered against the Applicant. The Applicant arrived in India on 10th January, 2020 and while returning to the United States on 21st February, 2020, he was arrested at Mumbai Airport as Look Out Notice was issued against him. He submitted that, the passport of the Applicant was already seized by the concerned Authority. He submitted that, in pursuance of Order dated 17th July, 2020, the Applicant has already filed an additional Affidavit dated 18th July, 2020. He submitted that, a letter issued by 'Attorney at Law' namely Esani and Momin, a Professional Corporation practicing in the field of Immigration matters in United States, have informed that, the Applicant's Green Card will be expiring on 29th July, 2020 and it is therefore, necessary for the Applicant to return to the United States before that day. Mr. Jha, further submitted that, in view of Sub-clause No. (ii) of Clause No. (C) of Sub-Section 13 of Ss. 1101 of Definitions of Immigration and Nationality Act, 1952 of the United States of America, the Applicant being a Green Card Holder, shall not remain outside United States for a period exceeding more than 6 months. He submitted that, since his date of arrival in India on 10th January, 2020 and his arrest on 21st February, 2020, the Applicant is now under fear of losing the Green Card, if he is not allowed to go to United States before 29th July, 2020. That, the Applicant has already booked necessary Air-tickets for to and fro journey. He further submitted that, if this Court grants permission to travel to United States, the Applicant will leave India on 25th July, 2020 and may return back in the midnight of 6th September, 2020. Mr. Jha, submitted that, since 10th March, 2015 till 10th January, 2020, the Applicant visited India at least on 16 different occasions and at that time, the police did not issue any summons to him. That, the Applicant was not aware of the fact that, the police have adopted proceedings for issuance of Look Out Notice. He submitted that, the Applicant has several joint family properties situated at Thane, Pune, Panvel and Alibag in the State and therefore, the Applicant has deep roots in India. That, the Complainant herein wants the Applicant to be blocked/entangled in litigation in India. He submitted that, the Applicant has several joint family properties situated at Thane, Pune, Panvel and Alibag in the State and therefore, the Applicant has deep roots in India. That, the Complainant herein wants the Applicant to be blocked/entangled in litigation in India. He further submitted that, the Applicant has now learnt a lesson by remaining behind bars for about 3 months and hereinafter will not breach any condition imposed upon him. Mr. Jha, further submitted that, if the Applicant is not allowed to go to United States, he will be put to irreparable suffering and loss. He relied on a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in that behalf, in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in (1999) 5 SCC 694. Mr. Jha, therefore submitted that, the Applicant may be permitted to travel abroad by directing him to furnish a bank guarantee or deposit of demand draft by way of security of reasonable amount. He therefore prayed that, the present Application may be allowed in its entirety. 11. Per contra, Mr. Gavand, learned APP vehemently opposed the Application. He submitted that, Mr. Sanjay Patil, Police Inspector (Crime), presently attached to Kapurbawadi Police Station, Thane City, has filed a detailed Affidavit dated 20th July, 2020. He submitted that, Order dated 19th May, 2020, passed by this Court granting temporary bail to the Applicant has to be read in consonance with Order dated 15th May, 2020 and in particular, paragraph No. 4 therein. He submitted that, in the present crime i.e. C.R. No. I-156 of 2014, the Applicant on 17th February, 2018 had filed Anticipatory Bail Application No. 452 of 2018 before the Trial Court and the Trial Court granted interim protection to the Applicant on the same day. He submitted that, taking disadvantage of the said interim relief, the Applicant fled away to U.S.A. That, the said Anticipatory Bail Application No. 452 of 2018 was subsequently rejected by the Trial Court by its Order dated 16th April, 2018, however, the Applicant neither returned to India nor surrendered to the jurisdiction of the Trial Court. He submitted that, therefore, after adopting the necessary and relevant procedure, Look Out Notice was issued by the concerned Authority and the Applicant has been arrested on 21st February, 2020 at the Airport. He submitted that, therefore, after adopting the necessary and relevant procedure, Look Out Notice was issued by the concerned Authority and the Applicant has been arrested on 21st February, 2020 at the Airport. He submitted that, the Applicant has also not annexed the copy of the impugned Order herein, dated 4th May, 2020, to the Bail Application No. 24 of 2020 and it has been annexed with the Affidavit of the Police Officer. He submitted that, the Applicant is also an accused in a crime bearing No. I-250 of 2013 registered with Kapurbawadi Police Station, Thane City under Sections 143, 148 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code dated 18th July, 2013. That, in the said crime the Applicant was arrested on 26th August, 2014 and has been released on cash bail of Rs. 5,000/-. He submitted that, the said fact has been suppressed by the Applicant in Bail Application No. 24 of 2020 and in the present Application. Mr. Gavand submitted that, in view of Sub-Section (iii) of Clause No. (C) of Sub-Section 13 of Ss. 1101 of Definitions of Immigration and Nationality Act, 1952 of the United States of America, the Applicant has engaged in illegal activity after departed the United States, in the years 2013 and 2014 in India and is involved in the afore-stated two crimes and therefore, the necessary legal consequences as per that Act will follow. He submitted that, the conduct of the Applicant do not permit him to go to United States even for a temporary period as the prosecuting agency has strong apprehension that, he will not come back to India to face trials in both the said crimes. He submitted that, the conduct of the Applicant, clearly denotes that, he has no regard for the law in India as he had on earlier occasion fled away after getting interim anticipatory bail. He further submitted that, the original Complainant was heard by the Trial Court, however, in the present Application the Applicant has not joined him as a necessary party and therefore, it also reflects on the conduct of the Applicant. At the cost of repetition, he submitted that, the Investigating Agency has expressed serious apprehension that, if the Applicant is permitted to go to United States, he will not come back. He therefore, prayed, that the present Application may be rejected. 12. At the cost of repetition, he submitted that, the Investigating Agency has expressed serious apprehension that, if the Applicant is permitted to go to United States, he will not come back. He therefore, prayed, that the present Application may be rejected. 12. A minute perusal of record would indicate that, the Applicant is also an Accused in C.R. No. I-250 of 2013 registered with Kapurbawadi Police Station dated 18th July, 2013 under Sections 143, 448 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code. The Applicant was arrested in the said crime on 26th August, 2014 and when he was produced for remand before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, 2nd Court, Thane, the concerned Court released him on cash bail of Rs. 3,000/-. The police, after completion of investigation, have submitted charge-sheet on 22nd September, 2014 in the said crime. The said case is now registered as Regular Court Case No. 62 of 2014 and is pending for final adjudication. This fact can clearly be discerned from the report dated 20th July, 2020, submitted by the Police Inspector (Crime), Kapurbawadi Police Station, Thane City to the learned APP. A Copy of the same is produced on record on 22nd July, 2020 by the learned APP. A copy of the said report dated 20th July, 2020, is also served upon the learned counsel for the Applicant by the learned APP. The Applicant has neither mentioned about the said fact of pending another crime against him nor even made a passing reference to that effect in Bail Application No. 24 of 2020. The Applicant has also not annexed copy of the impugned Order dated 4th May, 2020 passed below Exh. 1 in Bail Application No. 609 of 2020 passed by the Trial Court, to the Bail Application No. 24 of 2020 before this Court. The copy of the said Order is produced on record by the learned APP. Perusal of the said Order would indicate that, the Trial Court in its paragraph Nos. 5 and 10 has taken note of the same. The Police officer in his Affidavit in paragraph No. 13 has also affirmed the said fact. 13. The record further indicates that, after the Applicant came to the knowledge about the lodgment of the present crime, he filed Anticipatory Bail Application No. 452 of 2018 in the Court of District Judge-4 and Additional Sessions Judge, Thane. The Police officer in his Affidavit in paragraph No. 13 has also affirmed the said fact. 13. The record further indicates that, after the Applicant came to the knowledge about the lodgment of the present crime, he filed Anticipatory Bail Application No. 452 of 2018 in the Court of District Judge-4 and Additional Sessions Judge, Thane. The Trial Court, by its Order dated 17th February, 2018 granted interim relief in favour of the Applicant. It appears that, the Applicant was not directed to deposit his passport either with the Investigating Agency or with the Registry of the Trial Court and by taking undue advantage of the said situation, the Applicant fled away to United States of America. The Anticipatory Bail Application No. 452 of 2018 was subsequently rejected by the Trial Court by its Order dated 16th April, 2018 qua the Applicant and cancelled the interim relief granted to the Applicant. The Applicant thereafter, did not appear before the Trial Court and it appears that, even did not bother to inquire about the present case with his Advocate. The conduct of the Applicant fleeing from the ends of justice after obtaining interim anticipatory bail, speaks volumes. 14. The Applicant has been released on interim bail by this Court by its Order dated 19th May, 2020 and has come out of jail on 20th May, 2020. The operative part of the said Order has been produced in the foregoing paragraph No. 8. The said order was passed in furtherance of and in consonance with Order dated 15th May, 2020, wherein the co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in paragraph No. 4 has recorded the submissions of the learned counsel for the Applicant, which are reproduced in paragraph No. 7 above for the sake of convenience. 15. It is to be noted here that, the Applicant was allowed to be released on bail on his furnishing cash bail till he completes the procedure of furnishing sureties as mentioned in clause (a) of the said Order dated 19th May, 2020. Upon a query raised by this Court, the instructing Advocate Mr. Karmarkar of learned counsel Mr. Jha, informed this Court that, till date neither sureties have been furnished by the Applicant, nor any procedure has been adopted by him. Upon a query raised by this Court, the instructing Advocate Mr. Karmarkar of learned counsel Mr. Jha, informed this Court that, till date neither sureties have been furnished by the Applicant, nor any procedure has been adopted by him. Assuming for the sake of argument, the submission made by the learned counsel for the Applicant is accepted that, the Applicant is having deep roots in India, then in that event not getting one or more sureties within a period of 8 weeks to make up a reasonable amount of Rs. 25,000/-, cannot be accepted and it thus clearly shows that, the Applicant has no deep roots in India. 16. At this stage, it will not be out of way to place a fact on record that, in Bail Application No. 609 of 2020, filed before the Trial Court, the Applicant herein, has made a categorical statement that, the Applicant being a permanent residence of United States of America, has no reason to have a permanent address in Mumbai. The said fact is recorded by the Trial Court in sub-paragraph of paragraph No. 1 of the impugned Order dated 4th May, 2020. The uncle of Applicant namely Mr. Ramzanali Ibrahim Bhimani in his Affidavit dated 16th May, 2020 filed before this Court has stated that, the Applicant has settled in United States of America and whenever visits India, resides at his flat situated at Mira-Road, Bhayandar, District Thane. In view thereof also, it cannot be accepted that, the Applicant has deep roots in India. It has also been informed to this Court that, till date, the Applicant has not surrendered his Green Card with the Investigating Agency though was specifically directed by this Court as per clause (c) of Order dated 19th May, 2020. The Police Officer in his Affidavit-in-reply in paragraph No. 12 has stated that, he is not aware of the details of Green Card of the Applicant as the same is neither seized nor produced by the Applicant during the investigation. This clearly shows that, the Applicant has breached the said condition imposed upon him by this Court by its Order dated 19th May, 2020. This clearly shows that, the Applicant has breached the said condition imposed upon him by this Court by its Order dated 19th May, 2020. It is to be further noted here that, the interim bail granted to the Applicant by this Court has already come to an end on or about 15th July, 2020 and till date, the Applicant has not surrendered himself either before the Jail Authority or before the Court of Competent jurisdiction. This Court, till date, has not passed Order of extension of interim bail of the Applicant. All these factors including the past conduct of the Applicant and the present conduct i.e. breach of conditions imposed upon the Applicant by Order dated 19th May, 2020, as noted earlier clearly indicates that, the Applicant has taken the judicial system of this country for granted and for a ride. This cannot be countenanced. 17. Even otherwise, the period of 180 days for returning to United States has already come to an end. The communication dated 29th June, 2020, issued by the alleged Attorney at Law makes no reference to any provision of law whereby, the period of 180 days would be construed to come to an end on 29th July, 2020. A perusal of the said letter/communication would exhibit sorry state of affairs of the said Attorney at Law, who has addressed the said letter to "High Court of Bombay/Supreme Court of India" and had sought clarification, if any, directly by these Courts. Least said is better about the manner in which the said communication is addressed by the said Attorney at Law. 18. In the present Application, in paragraph No. 10 on page No. 7, the Applicant has pleaded that, the Applicant shall duly adhere to the most stringent conditions imposed by this Court, if the Applicant is permitted to go to U.S.A.. 18. In the present Application, in paragraph No. 10 on page No. 7, the Applicant has pleaded that, the Applicant shall duly adhere to the most stringent conditions imposed by this Court, if the Applicant is permitted to go to U.S.A.. In view thereof, during the course of hearing, this Court suggested the learned counsel for the Applicant that, assuming for the sake of arguments, if the Applicant is permitted to go to United States for stipulated period and with a view to have a check of his return to India, the copy of the present Order and Orders dated 15th May, 2020 and 19th May, 2020 passed in Bail Application No. 24 of 2020 along with the Order rejecting his Anticipatory Bail Application passed by the Trial Court and the information that, the Applicant is also involved in CR No. I-250 of 2013, be communicated by the Investigating Agency by all possible modes to the United States Consulate situated at Mumbai and to the Immigration Authorities of United States. Mr. Jha, the learned counsel for the Applicant, on instructions, submitted that, the same may not be done as it has serious consequences thereof. He submitted that, after getting information about the lodgment of the crimes against the Applicant in India, the Government of United States will not allow the Applicant to enter in their country and on instructions, refused to accept the said suggestion of this Court. 19. As far as the submission of the learned counsel of the Applicant that, during the period from 10th March, 2015 till 10th January, 2020, the Applicant visited India at least on 16 different occasions is concerned, it is to be noted here that, the Applicant though had availed the benefit of interim anticipatory bail by Order dated 17th February, 2018, did not bother to pursue or follow up his said Anticipatory Bail Application. That, the Applicant also did not attend the Trial Court in C.R. No. I-250 of 2013 during that period, to get information about the progress of the said case. As far as the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court relied upon by Mr. Jha, in the case of Gian Singh (Supra) is concerned, the facts mentioned in the said case and the case in hand, are materially different and therefore, the said decision is of no avail to the Applicant. As far as the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court relied upon by Mr. Jha, in the case of Gian Singh (Supra) is concerned, the facts mentioned in the said case and the case in hand, are materially different and therefore, the said decision is of no avail to the Applicant. There was no other crime registered against the Appellant therein. As noted earlier, the present is the second crime registered against the Applicant and the fact of lodgment of the earlier Crime No. I-250 of 2013 has not been mentioned by the Applicant either in Bail Application No. 24 of 2020 or in the present Application. 20. As noted earlier, it is only on the basis of the Look Out Notice issued by the concerned Authority, the Applicant while returning back to United States, had been apprehended by the Police at the Airport on 21st February, 2020. As noted earlier, the Applicant had fled to United States after getting a favourable Order of interim anticipatory bail on 17th February, 2018 and has to be arrested on Look Out Notice at Mumbai Airport. The Applicant has also breached conditions of temporary bail imposed upon him by this Court by its Order dated 19th May, 2020. I therefore, find substance in the apprehension expressed by the prosecuting agency that, if the Applicant is permitted to go abroad, he will not come back. From the past record of the Applicant and the facts mentioned hereinabove, it clearly appears to this Court that, if the Applicant is permitted to go to United States of America, he will not return and will not be available for trial in both the aforesaid crimes and will flee from ends of justice. 21. For the reasons stated herein above, this Court is of the Considered view that, the prayer of the Applicant permitting him to travel to United States cannot be granted. Application is accordingly rejected.