Dismissed

Mohammed Shamim Badgujar and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC16 Jan 2019APL/1143/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal application, the Bombay High Court directed the return of passports held from applicants facing criminal charges. The court ordered them to remain present on court dates personally or via counsel without leaving India without trial court permission.

What did the court decide?

Passports to be returned; applicants directed to remain present on court dates.

Mohammed Shamim Badgujar and Anr. Vs the State… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

10-apl-1143-2018.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1143 OF 2018

¶4

Mohammed Shamim Badgujar & Anr.

...Applicants

Versus

State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Mr.Girish Kulkarni I/b. Mr. Kripashankar Pandey for the Applicants. Mrs.Veera Shinde, APP for the Respondent -State.

¶10

CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATED : 16 JANUARY 2019

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

This Application is moved for returning of the passports.

¶13

The applicants are facing charges under sections 406, 420,

¶14

465, 468, 471 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code in C.C. No.

¶15

3163/PW/2016. By an order dated 23^rd April, 2018, the learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 24^th Court at Borivali directed the applicants to surrender the passports before this Court. By an order dated 14^th August, 2018, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Dindoshi Court, Mumbai has modified the order of bail and granted permission to the applicants to travel abroad with the permission of the trial Court.

¶16

Trupti Page 1 of 2

¶17

10-apl-1143-2018.doc

¶18

The learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants are builders, having their establishment in Santacruz, Mumbai. He has further submitted that the applicants own an immovable property and they are not going to ply away out of the country. The applicants undertake that they shall remain present on the court dates. Hence, he has prayed that the passports of the applicants are to be returned.

¶19

The learned APP while opposing this Application, has submitted that the presence of the applicants is required and, therefore, the passports were seized.

¶20

In view of the above submissions, the learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 24^th Court at Borivali to return the passports to the applicants and the applicants are directed to remain present on the court dates either personally or through their advocates. The applicants shall not leave India without permission of the trial Court as directed by the Sessions Court.

¶21

With this, Criminal Application is disposed of.

¶22

(MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

¶23

Trupti Page 2 of 2

Mohammed Shamim Badgujar and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Shamim Badgujar and Anr. 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

Hemant Vishwas Surryavanshi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Gulzeba Najum Kukad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sital Pankaj Jindal Vs Dr. Pankaj Rammohan Jindal and Ors.

Jagjeetsingh Mahendersingh Garcha Vs Romiel Nicil Samuel and Anr.

Zafar Ali S/O Late Asar Ali and Anr. Vs Gulsanobar Bano Zafar Ali and Anr.

M/S. Niki Gears Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs M/S. a to Z Alloys Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.