Allowed

Santosh Khemraj Todi and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC1 Apr 2019APPLN/148/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The high court allowed an application challenging a condition of anticipatory bail requiring prior permission for foreign travel. The court relaxed the condition, directing the accused to merely furnish itineraries and details abroad.

What did the court decide?

Condition requiring prior permission for foreign travel was relaxed; applicants must now furnish itineraries and abroad details to the sessions court.

Santosh Khemraj Todi and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

p507-appln-148-2019.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 148 OF 2019

¶4

Mrs.Santosh Khemraj Todi & Ors.

¶5

...Applicants

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra

¶8

...Respondent

¶9

-----

¶10

Ms.Chaula Solanki a/w.Mr.H.H.Nagi i/b.Nagi & Associates for the Applicants. Mrs.M.R.Tidke, APP for the Respondent-State.

¶11

CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE : 01 APRIL 2019

¶12

P.C.:

¶13

1. Upon urgent mentioning, taken on production board.

¶14

This Criminal Application is directed against the order dated

¶15

08.03.2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court, Borivali Division, Dindoshi in Misc. Application No. 259 of 2018.

¶16

The applicants/accused are facing prosecution under sections 498-A

¶17

and 406 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

1/3

¶19

Trupti

¶20

p507-appln-148-2019.doc

¶21

By this Criminal Application, the applicants/accused seek modification of the condition imposed on the applicants/accused at the time of granting anticipatory bail by order dated 26.04.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Borivali Div., Dindoshi, Mumbai. The applicants/accused were directed to take permission of the Court if they want to travel aboard.

¶22

Learned Counsel for the applicants/accused submits that applicant No.2 has to go abroad i.e., Munchen, Germany for taking medical assistance and, therefore, applicant No.1 i.e., wife requires to accompany applicant No.2 during the period of travel. She further submits that applicant Nos. 3 and 4 want to go abroad for their job.

¶23

Learned Public Prosecutor submits to the order of this Court.

¶24

In view of the submissions made by the learned Counsel and the reasons mentioned in the Criminal Application, I pass the following order :

¶25

ORDER

¶26

(i) Criminal Application is allowed;

¶27

(ii) Condition No. (a) imposed on the applicants/accused by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court, Borivali Division, Dindoshi vide order dated

¶28

2/3

¶29

Trupti

¶30

p507-appln-148-2019.doc

¶31

08.03.2019 is hereby relaxed. Instead of seeking permission of the Court before travelling abroad, the applicants/accused are directed to furnish their itineraries and the details of whereabout to the Sessions Court whenever they want to leave India.

¶32

(MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

¶33

3/3

¶34

Trupti

Santosh Khemraj Todi and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Khemraj Todi and Ors. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nikunj Mansukhlal Turakhia Vs the State of Maharashtra

Nikunj Mansukhlal Turakhia Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rukhmini Dharmaji Jadhav Deceased through Legal Heirs Santosh Dharmaji Jadhav and Ors. Vs Vaishalivishwanath Jadhav and Anr.

Islam Khastaul Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Baliram Ramchandra Atkale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Pravinkumar Mahadev Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra