1. Rule.
Learned APP, waives service of rule on behalf of respondent No.1 and Mr. P.S. Champaneri, learned advocate, waives service on behalf of respondent No.2.
2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the complaint dated 26.2.2006 was filed by respondent No.2 before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate for the offences under the Customs Act. Though adjudication proceedings are pending, but no charge sheet is filed in the criminal case. In view of the above, it is submitted that this application is restricted to applicant No.1 who has to travel frequently abroad for expansion of business and in the past the applicant No.1 had travelled abroad and the trial court permitted return of passport which was re-deposited on time and there is no breach of the order of bail.
3 I have heard Mr. P.S. Champaneri, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India appearing for respondent No.2, who has some reservation about relaxation of conditions of bail and submitted that the condition of deposit of passport may not be relaxed.
4 Having heard the learned advocates for the parties, considering the relevant aspects and the proceedings pending against the applicants under the Customs Act, I am inclined to modify condition Nos. (d) and (e) of paragraph 3 of the order 7.3.2008 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.2862 of 2006, to the extent that, whenever applicant No.1 leaves the country and travels abroad, he will inform the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence in advance and the condition imposed in paragraph 4 of the said order shall remain in abeyance upto 31.12.2012.
5 Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. D.S. Permitted.
(ANANT S. DAVE, J.) //smita// Top