Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 1736
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
SAMIR J. DAVE, J
PRANNOY SHASHIKANT BORDE – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO. 22583 of 2022 | Criminal Misc. Application No.130 of 2019
For the Appellants/Petitioners: MR NARENDRA L JAIN
For the Respondents: MR R. C. KODEKAR, APP
The court modified bail conditions to allow travel outside state for business needs, imposing a requirement for prior permission for international travel.
Headnote:The court addressed an application for modification to a bail condition restricting the applicants’ movement beyond Gujarat. The applicants stated their business involvements required travel outside the state, impacting operations. The court found merit in their request and modified the travel restriction accordingly. The decision recognized the necessity for the applicants to conduct business effectively. The court ruled that the applicants shall not leave the territory of India without prior permission from the Sessions Court.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. modification justified for business travel. (Para 2 , 4) |
| 2. opposition from the state's advocate. (Para 3 , 5) |
| 3. rule modified; prior permission required. (Para 6) |
| 4. final ruling of the court confirmed. (Para 7) |
ORDER
1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of Respondent-State.
2. By way of present application, the applicants seek modification of condition restricting applicants’ movement beyond the territory of State of Gujarat imposed vide order dated 19.02.2019 of the learned Sessions Court in Criminal Misc. Application No.130 of 2019.
3. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Narendra Jain for the applicants and learned APP Mr. R. C. Kodekar for the Respondent-State.
4. Learned Advocate Mr.Jain has submitted that the applicant no.1 is involved in the business of Sea-food on a very large scale. Due to which he has to travel to Mumbai, Chennai, Goa, etc. frequently to conduct business. The applicant no.1 is native of Nashik, Maharashtra and majority of family of the applicant no.1 resides in Nasik. Thus, the applicant no.1 being sole heir has to travel to Nasik to attend any social occasion. Whereas, the applicant no.2 is involved in the business of real estate and apart from that the applicant no.2 runs a fast food corner and is also involved in the business of Fisheries at Ara, Bihar. The applicants are engaged in the business of real estate. More particularly, the applicants are dealing in properties in the state of Gujarat and are looking to expand the real estate business beyond the State of Gujarat, but the condition imposed by the learned Sessions Court while granting bail is restricting the scope of business of the applicants. He, has, therefore prayed that the condition no.3 imposed by the learned Sessions Court vide order dated 19.02.2019 may be deleted and/or modified.
5. Learned APP Mr. R. C. Kodekar has strongly opposed the present application.
6. In view of the averments made in the application, the application is allowed. The condition no.3 imposed by the learned Sessions Court vide order dated 19.02.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.130 of 2019 is modified to the extent that the applicants shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Sessions Court.
7. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted. in Criminal Misc. Application No.130 of 2019 is modified to the extent that the applicants shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Sessions Court.
7. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted. (SAMIR J. DAVE,J) MEHUL B. TUVAR
