Allowed

Fazal Kasamali Jaffer v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC1 Feb 2012APPA/144/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Application filed by Fazal Kasamali Jaffer seeking permission to travel abroad and return of sequestered passports. The single-judge bench allowed the application on the terms and conditions imposed by the high court in earlier orders for a specified annual period.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed for one year on same terms as previous orders including itinerary reporting and no fresh bond deposit. Passports to be returned.

Fazal Kasamali Jaffer Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2012)

APPA144_2012

vsa

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 144 OF 2012

¶6

Fazal Kasamali Jaffer ... Applicant

¶7

vs.

¶8

The State of Maharashta ... Respondent

¶9

Mr. Nitin Sejpal, Advocate for the applicant. Mrs. A.A. Mane, APP for the State

¶10

CORAM : R.G. Ketkar, J. DATE : 1^st February, 2012.

¶11

P.C.

¶12

Heard Mr. Nitin Sejpal, learned counsel for the applicant and Mrs. A.A. Mane, learned APP for the State.

¶13

Mr. Sejpal states that he has already filed Vakalatnama. Statement of Mr. Sejpal is recorded.

¶14

By this application, the applicant is seeking direction to the Court of Sessions at Sewree, Mumbai to return the passport bearing No. Z-1747490 along with five other passports bearing nos. Z-1747490, Z-1515399, A-9011771, Z-1428957, A-2993414, K-856834 and he may be permitted to travel abroad at least for a period of one year from 1^st February, 2012 to 31^st January, 2012.

¶15

Mr. Sejpal invited my attention to the various orders passed by this Court right from 29^th April, 2008 whereby this Court directed to return all passports and permitted the applicant to travel from Mumbai to Singapore subject to imposing conditions.

¶16

Mrs. Mane, learned APP submitted that the appeal is of year 2006 and is ready for hearing. She, therefore, opposed the prayer made by the applicant.

¶17

¶18

APPA144_2012

¶19

I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties. Having regard to the fact that in the past, this Court has passed various orders in the applications claiming for identical reliefs made by the applicant as also having further regard to the fact that the applicant has not committed breach of any of the conditions imposed in those orders, in my opinion, the applicant has made out a case for grant of interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a). Hence, the application is disposed of in following terms:

¶20

(i) The application is allowed on the same terms, as are imposed on him by the earlier orders, for a period from 1^st February, 2012 to 31^st January, 2013.

¶21

(ii)The applicant shall, however, inform the Registrar of Sessions Court Sewree his itinerary every time he travels abroad. The Registrar, Sessions Court shall return the passport on furnishing such itinerary.

¶22

(iii)In view of the fact that the applicant has already deposited the amount of Rs.2,00,000/-in the Sessions Court, the Sessions Court shall not insist for fresh deposit.

¶23

(iv)The applicant is permitted to go abroad as per schedule at Exhibit Q. He shall also furnish information about his addresses,the telephone number/mobile number of the persons with whom he would transact his business during the said travel plan and also his own mobile number.

¶24

(v)On the applicant returning to Mumbai, he will surrender all the passports to the Sessions Court, Sewree.

¶25

(vi)All the parties are directed to act upon the authenticated copy of this Order.

¶26

[R.G. KETKAR, J ]

Fazal Kasamali Jaffer v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fazal Kasamali Jaffer v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rupesh Ravindra Mhaske Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rajni Sharad Sampat Vs the Administrator Administration of Daman and Anr.

Ashok Kashinath Kalbhor Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mukund Balwant Athavale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Prakash Laxman Chavan Vs State of Maharashtra

Jeetu @ Jalprakash Devdatta Vs the State of Maharashtra