2020 Supreme(SC) 748

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Indira Banerjee, JJ.
Parvez Noordin Lokhandwalla - Appellants
Versus
State of Maharashtra & Anr. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 648 of 2020
(Arising out of SLP(Crl) No 3420 of 2020)
Decided On : 01-10-2020

Bail – Conditions which court imposes for grant of bail have to balance public interest in enforcement of criminal justice with rights of accused. Human right to dignity and protection of constitutional safeguards should not become illusory by imposition of conditions which are disproportionate to need to secure presence of accused, proper course of investigation and eventually to ensure a fair trial.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 439 – Grant of interim bail – Relaxation of conditions – High Court declined to modify its earlier order so as to permit appellant to travel to US for a period of eight weeks – Appellant sought leave of High Court to do so as a Green Card holder – Appellant is alleged to be involved in offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 469, 470, 471 and 474 of Indian Penal Code 1860 read with provisions of Section 34 – Appellant was arrested at the point of departure in Mumbai in pursuance of a look-out notice – Private complaint which is genesis of present proceedings was instituted in January 2014 – Gravamen of allegation is that appellant has forged and fabricated Power of Attorney of his brother – Co-accused was granted bail by Sessions Judge – Details which have been furnished to Court by appellant, indicate that he has regularly travelled between US and India on as many as sixteen occasions between 2015 and 2020 – He has maintained a close contact with India – View of High Court that he has no contact with India is contrary to material on record – Lodging of FIR should not in facts of present case be a bar on travel of appellant to US for eight weeks to attend to business of revalidating his Green Card – Conditions which a court imposes for grant of bail have to balance public interest in enforcement of criminal justice with rights of accused – Human right to dignity and protection of constitutional safeguards should not become illusory by imposition of conditions which are disproportionate to need to secure presence of accused, proper course of investigation and eventually to ensure a fair trial – Conditions which are imposed by court must bear proportional relationship to the purpose of imposing conditions – Nature of risk which is posed by grant of permission as sought in this case must be carefully evaluated in each case – There is no reason or justification to deny him permission which has been sought to travel to US for eight weeks – Appellant is an Indian citizen and holds an Indian passport – Order of High Court set aside and appellant permitted to travel to US. (Paras 7, 21, 24 and 25)

Facts of the case:

Present appeal arises from a judgment and order of a Single Judge of High Court of Judicature at Bombay dated 23 July 2020. The High Court, by its order which is in appeal, declined to modify its earlier order dated 19 May 2020 so as to permit the appellant to travel to US for a period of eight weeks from 25 July 2020 to 6th September 2020. Appellant sought the leave of the High Court to do so since as a Green Card holder, it was mandatory for him to return to the US within a stipulated period of his departure from that country, failing which the conditions for revalidation of the Green Card would not be fulfilled. The High Court declined to relax the conditions imposed by it for the grant of interim bail on the ground that an FIR has been registered against the appellant.

Findings of Court:

On the return of appellant after eight weeks and if it becomes necessary for him to travel to the US, the appellant shall apply to the concerned court for permission to travel and any such application shall be considered on its own merits by the competent court. Appellant shall travel only upon grant of permission and subject to the terms imposed. Passport of the appellant shall be handed over to the appellant to facilitate his travel, subject to the condition that he shall deposit it with the investigating officer immediately on his return.

Result – Appeal disposed of with directions.