Allowed

Nisha Srivastava v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC7 Mar 2018APPA/278/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay, Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction, allowed an application for permission to travel abroad by a convicted wife of a public servant. She was permitted to visit Singapore and Australia from March to June 2018 to meet relatives, subject to cash security and the provision of itinerary details to the CBI.

What did the court decide?

Permission to travel abroad from 24th March 2018 to 25th June 2018 granted, subject to a cash security deposit of Rs. 50,000 with the trial Court and furnishing of itinerary details to the CBI.

Nisha Srivastava Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

12-APPA-278-2018.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.278 OF 2018 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.340 OF 2011

¶5

SMT.NISHA SRIVASTAVA )...APPLICANT

¶6

V/s.

¶7

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. )...RESPONDENTS

¶8

Mr.Rahul Arote, Advocate for the Applicant.

¶9

Mr.H.S.Venegaonkar, Advocate for the Respondent No.2/CBI.

¶10

Mr.Prashant Jadhav, APP for the Respondent - State.

¶11

CORAM : A. M. BADAR, J. DATE : 7^th MARCH 2018

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

1 This is an application for permission to travel abroad from 24^th March 2018 to 25^th June 2018 filed by the appellant/original accused no.2. The applicant/original accused no.2 is the wife of the public servant and she is convicted of

¶14

avk 1/3

¶15

12-APPA-278-2018.doc

¶16

offences punishable under Sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1 year, apart from imposition of fine and default sentence.

¶17

2 Heard both sides. Perused the application.

¶18

3 The applicant/original accused no.2 desires to meet her daughter and son-in-law as well as grandsons, who are residing at Singapore and from there she wants to visit Australia to see her niece.

¶19

4 Similar such application bearing no.580 of 2014 was allowed by this court on 7^th May 2014. The learned Advocate for the applicant/original accused no.2 submitted that in pursuant to the said order dated 7^th May 2014, the applicant/original accused no.2 duly returned back to India, and therefore, now also she needs to be permitted to visit her relatives residing in the foreign countries.

¶20

avk 2/3

¶21

12-APPA-278-2018.doc

¶22

5 Considering the fact that the appeal filed by the

¶23

applicant/original accused no.2 may not be heard in a short period, as well as for the stated reason, the application deserves to be allowed, and therefore the order :

¶24

ORDER

¶25

i) The application is allowed. ii) The applicant/original accused no.2 is permitted to travel abroad from 24^th March 2018 to 25^th June 2018.

¶26

iii) The applicant/original accused no.2 to deposit cash security of Rs.50,000/- before the learned trial court within a period of one week from today, for the purpose of traveling abroad.

¶27

iv) She shall be entitled to get back that amount on depositing the passport with the CBI after her return.

¶28

v) The applicant/original accused no.2 to furnish her residential address and contact numbers at the foreign countries she desires to visit to the prosecuting agency i.e. the CBI and also to furnish her tour itinerary to the prosecuting agency.

¶29

vi) With this, the application stands disposed of.

¶30

avk 3/3

Nisha Srivastava v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nisha Srivastava v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pushpalata Shankar Surve Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ramprakash @ Prakash Ramchander Bharti and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dilip Gunaji Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Wali Ahmed Shafi Ahmed Kazmi Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Munnavvarali Mohammed Sharafat Ali Khan @ Munna @ Nangi Talvar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Wali Ahmed S/O. Shafi Ahmed Kazmi Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra