9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 1258X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld not be fulfilled. The High Court declined to relax the conditions imposed by it for the grant of interim bail on the ground that an FIR has been registered against the appellant. Though the period during which the appellant sought to travel abroad has lapsed, the cause survives. The appeal raises interesting issues about the interface between the fundamental right to travel abroad and its curtailment under a judicial order as an incident to regulate conditions governing the grant of bail. 3. The genesis of the present case arises from a private complaint which was filed in January 2014 by Mehraj Rajabali Merchant in the court of the JMFC Thane alleging that the appellant has fabricated a Power of Attorney dated 19 December 2011 by forging the signature of his brother, Shalin Lokhandawalla. On 10 April 2014, the JMFC passed an order, by which he directed an investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 "CrPC" in terms of the following directions: "1. The Kapurbavdi police station is directed to register the crime and investigate into the matter. 2. Further it is hereby directed to submit the report before the court for taking action, if any, u/s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 26/10/2018 Mumbai 29. 22/11/2018 Mumbai 30. 14/12/2018 Mumbai 31. 4/4/2019 Mumbai 32. 22/5/2019 Mumbai 33. 10/1/2020 Mumbai 7 The appellant arrived in India on 10 January 2020. He was arrested on 21 February 2020 at the point of departure in Mumbai in pursuance of a look-out notice which appears to have been issued on the basis of the FIR dated 22 April 2014. An application for bail was filed before the Sessions Court in the first week of March 2020 but was rejected on 4 May 2020. On 23 April 2020, the appellant filed an application for bail before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. The High Court, by its order dated 19 May 2020, granted temporary bail to the appellant, subject to the following conditions: "a) The applicant be released on temporary bail for a period of eight weeks in C.R. No.I-156 of 2014 registered with Kapurbavadi Police Station, Thane on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one or more sureties to make up the amount. b) Till the procedure for furnishing sureties is completed, the applicant is permitted to furnish cash bail. c) Before his actual release from jail, the Applicant i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... horization by an immigration officer." 9 The High Court, by its order dated 26 June 2020, rejected the application for considering his prayer for relaxing the conditions attaching to the grant of interim bail following which the appellant moved this Court SLP (Crl) No 3034 of 2020. By an order dated 13 July 2020, this Court requested the High Court to take up the IA filed by the appellant seeking permission to travel to the US, at an early date. This Court, in its order dated 13 July 2020, noted the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant in paragraph 2 of its order and then issued the following directions: "2. Mr Subhash Jha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that in the event that the petitioner is unable to arrive in the US by 29 July 2020, he will not be in a position to retain his Green Card as he is required to return to the US within 180 days of his departure and his status will then be that of an alien seeking entry into the US. 3. Since the interim application which has been filed by the petitioner is pending before the High Court, we request the High Court to take it up at an early date having regard to the timeline which ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r of the JMFC dated 10 April 2014 has been passed as a matter of routine course without application of mind and has been misused by the police machinery to harass and arrest the appellant at the behest of an adversary. 12 Mr Jha further submitted that the appellant would undertake to come to India on every hearing of the criminal cases before the concerned courts and he has no intention to evade the process of law. Mr. Jha has stated that in pursuance of the notice issued by this court, the complainant has been served. 13 On the other hand, Mr. Sachin Patil, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State of Maharashtra, who appeared in pursuance of the notice issued by this Court on 29 July 2020, submitted that the conduct of the appellant has been improper. Mr. Patil stated that, on the grant of anticipatory bail by the Sessions Court in 2018, the appellant left for the US, without seeking permission, though as a matter of fact, he returned subsequently to India on several occasions until 2020, when he was arrested. It was urged that the appellant has not complied with the conditions on which he was granted interim bail for eight weeks and he ought to have, but has not, surren ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... meaning should be shunned because of purposive interpretation. 10. ... from the perusal of the impugned order it is clear that the court exceeded its jurisdiction in imposing such arbitrary conditions. Some of the conditions imposed are highly onerous and are absurd. Such onerous anticipatory bail conditions are alien and cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. The conditions imposed appear to have no nexus with the good administration of justice or advancing the trial process, rather it is an over-zealous exercise in utter disregard to the very purpose of the criminal justice system. In view of the above, the impugned order passed by the High Court is set aside and the interim protection granted to the Petitioner by this Court... is made absolute." 16 In Dataram Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh (2018) 3 SCC 22, this Court observed that: "7. ....The grant or refusal of bail is entirely within the discretion of the judge hearing the matter and though that discretion is unfettered, it must be exercised judiciously and in a humane manner and compassionately. Also, conditions for the grant of bail ought not to be so strict as to be incapable of compliance, thereby making the grant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... afted as a condition for the grant of anticipatory-bail in this case. ......At best, the condition for seeking permission before travelling abroad could have been regulated, not deleted altogether." 19 This Court has passed multiple orders previously allowing an accused enlarged on bail to travel abroad. In Ganpati Ramnath v State of Bihar Crlmp. Nos. 6304 & 6305/2017 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 1187/2004, order dated 4 May 2017., this Court allowed an accused-applicant to travel abroad for medical treatment, modifying its earlier bail order, noting that the applicant had travelled abroad on the ground of medical necessity on six occasions with the permission of the court and had returned. In K. Mohammed v The State of Kerala Criminal Appeal Nos. 547/2012, order dated 2 March 2020., this Court allowed the accused-appellant to travel abroad to meet in the exigencies of a family situation. In Tarun Trikha v State of West Bengal Special Leave to Appeal Crl. Nos. 4643/2015, order dated 29 May 2015., this Court allowed the accused-petitioner to travel to Indonesia in connection with his employment and to return once the work was completed. In Pitam Pradhan v State of A P Special Leave to A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3/2010 Firdaus Rajabali Merchant Vs. Farida Firoz Lokhandwala Argument 3.8.2020 2. 2nd Civil Judge, JD, JMFC, Thane - Misc. Cr. Application 799/2017 Firdaus Rajabali Merchant Vs. 1. Parvez N. Lokhandwala 2. Farida N. Lokhandwala Order 10.8.2020 3. 8th Dist. Judge MCA/10/2020 Mehraj Rajabali Merchant Vs. 1. Parvez Noor. Lokhandwala 2. Farida Noor. Lokhandwala 3. Faizmin Amin Husain 4. Dinaz Akbar 5. Shalin Noor. Lokhandwala 6. Arun Fatehpuria 7. Firdaus Rajabali Merchant 8. Thane Municipal Corp. Commissioner Notice Unready 19.08.2020 4. 5th Court Joint Civil Judge Sr. Div., Thane Civil MA/200687/2015 Mehraj Rajabali Merchant Vs. 1. Parvez Noor. Lokhandwala 2. Farida Noor. Lokhandwala 3. Faizmin Amin Husain 4. Dinaz Akbar 5. Shalin Noor. Lokhandwala 6. Arun Fatehpuria 7. Firdaus Rajabali Merchants 8. Thane Municipal Corp. Commissioner 9. Ganesh Hanuman Autee 10. Sanjay Salvi 11. Amarjit Singh Dhri File of Stay 19.8.2020 5. Civil Judge Senior Division, Thane Civil MA/200404/2015 Farida Firoz Lokhandwala Vs. Farida Noor. Lokhandwala Notice 19.8.2020 6. 5th Court Joint Civil Judge, Sr. Div, Thane RCS/200566/2013 Me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court that he has no contact with India is contrary to the material on record. The lodging of an FIR should not in the facts of the present case be a bar on the travel of the appellant to the US for eight weeks to attend to the business of revalidating his Green Card. The conditions which a court imposes for the grant of bail - in this case temporary bail - have to balance the public interest in the enforcement of criminal justice with the rights of the accused. The human right to dignity and the protection of constitutional safeguards should not become illusory by the imposition of conditions which are disproportionate to the need to secure the presence of the accused, the proper course of investigation and eventually to ensure a fair trial. The conditions which are imposed by the court must bear a proportional relationship to the purpose of imposing the conditions. The nature of the risk which is posed by the grant of permission as sought in this case must be carefully evaluated in each case. 22 Mr. Sachin Patil submitted that the appellant was granted temporary bail for a period of eight weeks by the High Court, by its order dated 19 May 2020, and the appellant has neither fur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
