IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.6475 of 2009 ABHINAV SINHA, Son of Sri Amarendra Kumar Sinha, Resident of Mohalla- Damuchak, P.S. Kazi Mohammadpur, District-Muzaffar- pur at present working in NIIT Technologies Limited, 8, Balaji Estate, Sundarshan Munjal Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi and at present Residing at Q-1/2 MS Flats, Sector-13, R.K.Puram, New Delhi --------------------- Petitioner Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR THRU.C.B.I. ----- Opp.Party ----------- For the petitioner : M/S Chitranjan Sinha, Sr. Advocate, and Sanjeet Kumar, Advocate For the State through CBI: Mr. Bipin Kumar Sinha, S.C. of CBI ------------ O R D E R The petitioner who is an accused in Spl.. Case no.23 of 1997 ( R.C. Case no. 43( A) of 1997) is aggrieved by and has prayed for the quashing of the order dated 20.1.2009 passed therein by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I-cum- Special Judge, C.B.I., North Bihar, Patna , whereby the petitioner’s petition under Section 438(2)(iii) Cr.P.C. with a prayer to grant permission to the petitioner to go abroad in connection with his employment has been rejected. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that a Bench of this Court by order dated 14.2.2006 passed in Cr.Misc.No.7108 of 2006 was pleased to grant permission to the petitioner to go abroad for a period of two years and a copy of the said order has been appended to this application as Annexure-3. It is further stated that the petitioner thereafter joined another Company , namely, NIIT Technologies Ltd., and was required to go abroad in connection with work of the Company and had undertaken two trips - 2 - to Germany during the periods 19.9.2007 to 29.9.2007 and 21.10.2007 to 8.11.2007. It was also sought to be submitted that the petitioner again moved the court below through petition dated 17.12.2007 praying therein that he may be granted further permission for a period of at least two years to leave India and to go to other foreign countries as he was frequently required to travel abroad in connection with the work of the Company. The filing of this petition was necessitated by the fact that the permission for two years granted by this Court vide Annexure-3 had expired, but the said petition did not find favour of the court below who rejected the same. Subsequently, this Court by an order dated 8.2.2008 passed in Cr.Misc.no.5072 of 2008 was pleased to permit the petitioner to travel abroad for a period of one year. In support of the submission, the copy of the order aforesaid dated 8.2.2008 has been appended as Annexure- 4 to the application. It is submitted that the permission of one year granted by the Bench of this Court by order dated 8.2.2008 expired and in view of the petitioner by now having been promoted as Senior Business Executive and re-assigned to Australia by the Company was required to travel abroad frequently in connection with the business of the Company necessitating further permission for a period of another three years to leave India. It was also submitted that in the event permission is not granted, serious jeopardy to his prospects with the company would result and, accordingly his career would be affected adversely. The learned counsel further submitted that on the earlier two - 3 - occasions when this Court had granted the privilege and liberty to travel abroad, he had never misused the benefits of such privilege. The proposal was seriously opposed by the learned Standing Counsel for the C.B.I. who submitted that if the permission to leave the country was granted to the petitioner, then there would be difficulty for the prosecuting agency to procure his attendance in the court below in future. Assailing the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the C.B.I. the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that although the chargesheet has been submitted as far as in October, 2001, no effective progress has been made in this case and that apart he had been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is allowed to undertake his visit to Australia for a period of three years on condition that he shall present himself in the court on the date, so fixed by the court below, and further file an affidavit in same terms as detailed in order dated 8.2.2008 passed in Cr.Misc.No.5072 of 2008. In view of what has been discussed above, the application is allowed and the impugned order is hereby quashed. ( Abhijit Sinha, J ) Patna High Court,Patna Date: the 27th March,2009 Nawal Kishore Singh/A.F.R.