Allowed

Brillant Patrick Jacky Henry Morris v. Shilpa Ramnath Pai and Ors.

Bombay HC27 Sept 2023IA/2496/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an interim application by an accused, currently under appeal against acquittal, permitting him to travel to France, Greece, and Portugal for four months to visit his ailing mother, subject to fortnightly reporting via video conferencing.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to travel to France, Greece and Portugal for four months from the date of grant of return visa, conditional on fortnightly video conferencing reporting.

Brillant Patrick Jacky Henry Morris Vs Shilpa Ramnath Pai and… — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

IA 2496-2023.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2496 OF 2023

¶4

IN

¶5

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1169 OF 2019

¶6

Brillant Patrick Jacky Henry Morris...Applicant
Versus
Shilpa Ramnath Pai & Ors....Respondents

¶7

Mr. Yakshay Chheda a/w Ms. Riddhi Natekar, for the Applicant.

¶8

Mr. K.V.Saste, A.P.P for the Respondent-State.

¶9

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &
 GAURI GODSE, JJ.
 DATE : 27th SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

1. By this Interim Application, the applicant seeks permission

¶12

to travel abroad i.e. to France, Greece and Portugal, for a period of
four months from the date of grant of return visa.

¶13

2.Perused the application/papers. The applicant was

¶14

Wakodikar

¶15

1/4

¶16

IA 2496-2023.doc

¶17

acquitted by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Sessions Court,
Borivali Division, Dindoshi, vide Judgment and Order dated 2nd
March, 2019, passed in Special Case No. 37 of 2018.

¶18

3.Being aggrieved by the said Judgment and Order of
acquittal, the complainant preferred the aforesaid appeal against the
applicant’s acquittal. The said appeal was admitted by this Court vide
order dated 21st January, 2020.

¶19

4.It appears that subsequently, pursuant to the 390 action
taken in the aforesaid appeal, the applicant gave surety, as directed by
the trial Court. Subsequently, one of the surety was replaced and we
are informed that as of today, the applicant has furnished sureties to
the satisfaction of the trial Court. Statement accepted.

¶20

5.The applicant had earlier filed an application seeking
permission to travel abroad for a period from August, 2022 till
November, 2022. The application was filed on the ground that the

¶21

Wakodikar

¶22

IA 2496-2023.doc

¶23

applicant wanted to meet his ailing mother, aged 86 years, who is bed
ridden. For the reasons set out in that application, we allowed the
said application and permitted the applicant to travel to France for a
period from first week of August, 2022 to the third week of
November, 2022. During the said period, the applicant was directed
to report to the Consulate in France, once a fortnight.

¶24

6.It is not in dispute that the applicant is a French national,
who is living in India since 1992. Admittedly, whilst admitting the
appeal against acquittal of the applicant, no condition was imposed
either by this Court or by the trial Court restraining the applicant
from travel abroad. It appears that the applicant, by way of an
abundant precaution, filed the aforesaid application seeking
permission.

¶25

7.For the reasons set out in the application that the applicant
wants to meet his mother in France and intends to travel to Greece
and Portugal, we allow the application and as such, permit the

¶26

3/4

¶27

Wakodikar

¶28

IA 2496-2023.doc

¶29

applicant to travel to France, Greece and Portugal, for a period of four
months from the date of grant of his return visa.

¶30

8.During the said period that the applicant is in
France/Greece/Portugal, he shall report to the Consulate in France,
through Video Conferencing, once a fortnight.

¶31

9. The Interim Application is allowed and disposed of on the

¶32

aforesaid terms.

¶33

10.All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this

¶34

order.

¶35

GAURI GODSE, J. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

¶36

4/4

¶37

Wakodikar

Brillant Patrick Jacky Henry Morris v. Shilpa Ramnath Pai and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brillant Patrick Jacky Henry Morris v. Shilpa Ramnath Pai and Ors.

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

Chetan R. Shah Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sanket Kailas Dhainje Vs State of Maharashtra

Balu Atmaram Chavan Vs State of Maharashtra

Abdul Rasheed Alias Basheer S/O Mohiddin Sahib Vs Enforcement Directorate and Ors.

Shamsuddin Nuruddin Dosani Vs State of Maharashtra

Devidas Madhukar Tarawane Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.