Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Asim vs State

High Court Of Gujarat|02 July, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

This Application has been preferred by the original accused no.5 of the offence registered with CID Crime, Rajkot Zone Police Station vide CR-I No.9 of 2010 with a prayer that condition No.17(E) imposed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Application No.9628 of 2011 vide order dated 12th September 2011 be suspended from its operation for a period of 15 days so as to enable the accused-applicant to go abroad.
It appears that the accused-applicant herein was ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in connection with the offence registered with CID Crime, Rajkot Zone Police Station vide CR-I No.9 of 2010 by order of this Court dated 12th September 2011 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.9628 of 2011. While ordering release of the accused-applicant on anticipatory bail certain conditions were imposed and one such condition i.e. Condition No.17(E) reads as under :
"17(E).
will not leave India without the permission of the Court and, if is holding a passport, shall surrender the same before the trial Court within a week."
On the strength of the order passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Application No.9628 of 2011, the accused-applicant joined the investigation and appeared before the Investigating Officer who, in turn, released him on bail.
By way of this Application, it has been urged that the accused-applicant is a Director of a Multinational Company named Welspun Corporation Limited. Mr.Navin Pahwa, learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that Welspun Corporation Limited has business operations in America and in the Middle East countries. Mr.Pahwa further submitted that being the Director and the business head, inter-office correspondence dated 20th June 2012 is exchanged informing the accused-applicant that considering the vast experience with project management and executive skills, the Management of Welspun Corporation Limited requires the services of the applicant to head the forthcoming infrastructure projects at the Republic of Guinea. Relying on the communication, Mr.Pahwa submitted that for the technical assessment at the port site and to submit first response report to the Government of Guinea, the presence of the applicant is needed.
Mr.Pahwa, therefore, urged that this Court may suspend the operation of Condition No.17(E) for a period of 15 days to enable the accused-applicant to travel abroad, subject to the terms and conditions. Mr.Pahwa has also given a tentative complete itinerary of the programme, which is as under :
"July 4, 2012 Depart from India July 5, 2012 Reaching Conakry July 6 to July 8 Visit to Benty Site and Local Area July 9, 2012 Meeting with Port Authority July 10, 2012 Meeting with the Ministry of Transport July 10/11, 2012 Returning to India"
The matter was taken-up for hearing on 29th June 2012 and Mr.J.K.Shah, learned APP appearing for the State was requested to obtain instructions in this regard. Mr.J.K.Shah, learned APP appearing for the State submitted that he has obtained necessary instructions from the concerned Investigating Offier and in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, Condition No.17(E) may be suspended from its operation for a period of 15 days but subject to certain terms and conditions to protect the interest of the prosecution. However, at the same time, Mr.J.K.Shah, learned APP submitted that the entire condition No.17(E) may not be deleted as prayed for in the Application.
Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and having gone through the materials on record, I find that the accused-applicant has furnished the necessary details about his visit to the Republic of Guinea. As such, there is no apprehension expressed that the process of the Court would be abused or that he would not be available for trial. What emerges from the materials on record is that the accused-applicant is a Director of a Multinational Company and having its operations in U.S.A. as well as in the Middle East countries.
Under such circumstances, I am of the view that Condition No.17(E) can be suspended from its operation for a couple of days, on the following terms and conditions :
The accused-applicant shall apply in writing for return of the passport with the concerned Court at Kutch-Bhuj and upon such application being preferred by the accused-applicant, the concerned Court shall handover the passport to the accused-applicant immediately.
On receipt of the passport from the Court, the accused-applicant shall immediately apply for visa and, no sooner the accused-applicant is able to obtain visa, from that date condition No.17(E) will remain under suspension from its operation for a period of 15 days.
The complete itinerary i.e. the programme of the accused-applicant's stay at the Republic of Guinea shall be provided to the concerned Investigating Officer before leaving India.
The accused-applicant shall inform the Investigating Officer the exact date of his departure and other details and immediately on return to India, shall inform about the same to the concerned Investigating Officer as well as shall surrender the passport to the concerned Court at Kutch-Bhuj.
With the above directions, this Application is disposed of. Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(J.B.Pardiwala, J.) /moin Top
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Asim vs State

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
02 July, 2012