Allowed

Ramesh Himatlal Shah v. Union of India and Ors.

Bombay HC11 Jun 2024IA/2178/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an interim application, the Bombay High Court permitted the applicant, Ramesh Himatlal Shah, to travel to Moscow for business from June to October 2024. The court stayed the Look Out Notice operation during these dates subject to specific disclosure requirements regarding itinerary and contact details to the investigating agency.

What did the court decide?

Permitted travel to Moscow via Doha and Dubai from June to October 2024 with a stay on the Look Out Notice operation pending the specified periods, subject to mandatory itinerary disclosure and agency

Ramesh Himatlal Shah vs Union of India and Ors. — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Jyoti

¶2

901-IA- 2178-24 IN WP-440-23.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2178 OF 2024 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 440 OF 2023

¶5

Ramesh Himatlal Shah .. Applicant V/S. Union Of India And Ors .. Respondents

¶6

Ms. Kalyani Wagle i/b. T.N.Tripathi & Co. for the Applicant.

¶7

Mr. S.K.Halwasia, Addl.P.P. for the Respondent- No.1 & 2.

¶8

Mr. Sukanta Karmarkar, APP for the Respondent No. 3-State.

¶9

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &

¶10

SHYAM C. CHANDAK, JJ. DATE : 11th JUNE, 2024.

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

1 Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

¶13

2 By this Interim Application, the applicant seeks permission

¶14

to travel to Moscow via Doha from 16^th June 2024 to 30^th June 2024 for business purpose. The applicant also intends to travel to Moscow via Dubai from 6^th October 2024 to 13^th October 2024. Hence, the

¶15

1/5

¶16

Jyoti

¶17

901-IA- 2178-24 IN WP-440-23.doc

¶18

applicant seeks suspension of the Look Out Notice (“LOC”), issued against him during the said period from 16^th June 2024 to 13^th October, 2024.

¶19

3 The learned Counsel for the applicant states that earlier the applicant has traveled overseas, on 17 occasions, pursuant to the Orders passed by this Court. She submits that till date charge-sheet has not been filed by the Respondents-SFIO, in the said case. She submits that the applicant has abided by all terms and conditions, stipulated in the said Orders, whilst traveling overseas.

¶20

4 Mr. Halwasia learned counsel for Respondent No.1 and 2

¶21

has no objection. He fairly states that the applicant is not a flight risk.

¶22

5 Perused the application. It is not in dispute that the applicant had traveled overseas on several occasions, pursuant to the Orders passed by this Court. It is also not in dispute that Applicant has complied with the terms and conditions as stipulated in the said Orders. The Applicant has annexed the said Orders, to this Application. It

¶23

2/5

¶24

Jyoti

¶25

901-IA- 2178-24 IN WP-440-23.doc

¶26

appears that presently the Applicant intends to travel to Moscow via Doha from 16^th June 2024 to 30^th June 2024 and again to Moscow via Dubai from 6^th October 2024 to 13^th October 2024, for business purpose.

¶27

6 Considering the aforesaid, there is no impediment in allowing the Application. Accordingly, the Application is allowed in the following terms and conditions.

¶28

ORDER

¶29

(i) The applicant-Ramesh Himatlal Shah is permitted to travel overseas to Moscow via Doha from 16^th June 2024 to 30^th June 2024 and again to Moscow via Dubai from 6^th October 2024 to 13^th October 2024.

¶30

(ii) The applicant, 48 hours prior to his departure, shall furnish his full itinerary of his overseas travel with all details, including the address/addresses where he would stay, his telephone/mobile/contact numbers, on which he can be

¶31

3/5

¶32

Jyoti

¶33

901-IA- 2178-24 IN WP-440-23.doc

¶34

contacted during the said period, to the respondent No.2 SFIO, via e-mail/fax or any other electronic mode;

¶35

(iii) The respondent No.2-SFIO shall inform the Immigration Authorities of the order passed today, at the earliest and in any event within 48 hours of this order being uploaded;

¶36

(iv) The Immigration Authorities, on all points of departure, shall permit the applicant to pass through immigration and to board flight or flights, irrespective of whether the immigration system has been updated and whether the SFIO has informed the Immigration Authorities or not;

¶37

(v) In the meantime, the operation of the LOC issued at the behest of the respondent No.2, against the applicant, is stayed during the said period i.e. from 16^th June 2024 to 13^th October 2024.

¶38

4/5

¶39

Jyoti

¶40

901-IA- 2178-24 IN WP-440-23.doc

¶41

(vi) Interim Application is allowed and disposed of in above

¶42

terms.

¶43

(vii) All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

¶44

SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

¶45

5/5

Ramesh Himatlal Shah v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Himatlal Shah v. Union of India 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

Vishwas Banda Lohar vs State of Maharashtra

Ananda Tukaram Sonawane vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Manoj Premchand Jain vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Kiran Madhukar Sadamate vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Deepak Babaso Balwan vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Manoj Premchand Jain vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.