The court balanced the applicant/appellant's request to travel with the need to ensure compliance and mitigate the risk of not returning to India.

JUDGMENT (Oral)

CRL.M.A. 19459/2023 (Exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application is disposed of.

CRL.M.A. 19458/2023

3. Vide the present application, the applicant/appellant is seeking following reliefs:

"(i) Modify the condition laid down in paras (i) and (iv) of the Order dated 27.08.2004 passed by this Hon'ble Court in Criminal Appeal No. 585 of 2003; and

(ii) Permit the Applicant to leave the limits of the NCT of Delhi in order to travel to Chicago, United States of America for a period of four weeks."

4. Vide Judgment dated 16.07.2003, the applicant/appellant was convicted for the offences punishable under Section 20 of Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) and Section 124-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Thereafter, vide Order dated 21.07.2003, the applicant/appellant was sentenced to undergo 5 years (five) of imprisonment under Section 20 of POTA along with a fine of Rs.25,000/- and in default to further undergo imprisonment of 1 year (one) and also to undergo 7 years (seven) of imprisonment under Section 124-A of IPC along with a fine of Rs.25,000/- and in default to further undergo one year imprisonment. However, the said sentence imposed on the applicant/appellant was suspended vide Order dated 27.08.2004 by observing as under:

"ORDER

27.08.2004

Having heard Mr. Salman Khurshid, learned senior counsel and Ms. Mukta Gupta, standing counsel for the respondent, we are of the view that the appellants have made out a case for suspension of the sentence imposed upon them by the trial court. We, therefore, suspend the sentence imposed by the trial court on both the appellants subject to the appellants' furnishing personal bonds in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. The enlargement of the appellants is further subject the following conditions:

1. Appellant No. 1, Mohd. Yasin Patel @ Falahi, shall not leave the limits of National Capital Territory of Delhi without the prior permission of this Court. In so far as appellant No. 2, Mohd. Ashraf Jaffary is concerned, it is directed that he may leave the limits of NCT of Delhi only for purposes of living and/or visiting Chandpur in Bijnaur district, UP, his native place.

2. The appellants shall, before release from custody, furnish to this court with copies to the Investigating Officer, the addresses at which they will be residing and intimate the changes in such addresses, if any, in future.

3. The appellants shall not engage themselves in any illegal or unlawful activity while they are on bail.

4. The appellants shall report to the jurisdictional police station once a month.

Needless to say that in the event of violation of any one of the terms stipulated herein above, the present order shall be liable to be recalled and the appellants remanded to the custody.

The appeal shall now be posted for final hearing at its turn, and shall not be treated as part heard by this bench.

Delivery of the order to the parties dasti is permitted."

5. The applicant/appellant undertakes that he shall return to India within the time limit to be granted by this Court.

6. The applicant/appellant further undertakes that he shall not seek any further permission on whatsoever ground.

7. Mr. Trideep Pais, learned Senior Counsel for the applicant/appellant, submits that the applicant/appellant has a wife, 3 (three) daughters and 2 (two) sons, who all are citizens of India, holding valid Indian passports, except the younger son, namely, Mr. Abdulla Mujahid Patel. Though Mr. Abdulla Mujahid Patel was holding a valid Indian passport, however, it had expired on 30.07.2019 and thereafter, the same has not been renewed till date.

8. The applicant/appellant submits that he is ready to surrender all the passports in respect of his wife, namely, Smt. Farhana Jafri, two sons, namely, Mr. Yahiya Khalid Patel and Mr. Abdulla Mujahid Patel and one daughter, namely, Sadiya Yaseen Patel, before this Court along with surety as deems