APPP/1225/2017 of POONAM JAIDEV SHROFF Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA on 28 December 2017

1. The applicant is an accused in C.R.No.169/16registered with Khar Police Station u/s 328, 323, 504 r/w 34of IPC r/w 34 of IPC. The FIR was lodged at the instance ofhusband of the applicant. The applicant was grantedanticipatory bail by learned Additional Sessions Judge vide hisorder dated 27/04/2016, in connection with the said offence

2.

2 / 4 501-APPPST-1225-17.odtand one of the conditions imposed on the applicant was thatthe applicant should not leave India without prior permissionof the Court. The charge-sheet is already filed. In thesecircumstances the applicant had preferred CriminalApplication No.555/17 before this Court praying forpermission to travel abroad in terms of proposed itineraryannexed to the said application. The said application wasdisposed of by this Court vide order dated 12/12/2017. Theapplication was allowed in terms of the prayer clause (c)made in the said application and was permitted to travelabroad in terms of the proposed itinerary annexed to the saidapplication. At that time, the applicant had intended to visitDubai/Maldives/Mauritius/Europe with her minor daughterMs.Rudritara Shroff.

The learned counsel for the applicant submits thatthe application for Visa was not made in time and they havenot been communicated regarding grant or rejection of theVisa and therefore she has changed her plan to visit the

3.

4. 3 / 4 501-APPPST-1225-17.odtaforesaid countries and now wants to travel to Hong Kong forwhich she has already received confirmation of the Visa andtherefore she seeks permission to visit abroad not at theaforementioned countries as permitted by the order dated12/12/2017, but to Hong Kong.

When the order was passed in Criminal ApplicationNo.555/17, the learned counsel representing originalcomplainant was present before the Court and had not raisedany serious objection for the grant of relief in that application.

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant as wellas the learned APP for State. The officer instructing learnedAPP is present in the Court. The respondent/State ofMaharashtra has no objection for grant of relief in thisapplication. Their only contention is that the Court shouldimpose a condition on the applicant that on her return, sheshould deposit her passport with Khar Police Station.

5.

6.

7.

8. 4 / 4 501-APPPST-1225-17.odt

Taking into consideration the order dated12/12/2017 passed in Criminal Application No.555/17, bywhich, this Court has already granted permission to theapplicant to travel abroad; the present application can beallowed. By the said order this Court has observed that theapplicant should deposit the passport within a period of oneweek from 03/01/2018. In view of the interveningcircumstances, in which the applicant could not visit thosecountries, I am inclined to extend the said period from03/01/2018 to 07/01/2018.

The applicant is directed to deposit the passport till10/01/2018 and she should return back on or before07/01/2018.

The application is disposed of accordingly.

Parties to act upon the copy duly authenticated bythe Court Sheristedar.

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)