SM 1 907.wp.761.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 761 OF 2011 David Peter Gamjya ....Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent ____________ Mr. Kapil P. Shetye for the Petitioner. Mr. Y. M. Nakhwa, APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM: B. R. GAVAI, J. DATED : 22ND JULY, 2011. P.C.: Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent. 2. By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 9th January, 2011 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Vasai, thereby dismissing the revision of the present petitioner, which was in turn filed challenging the order dated 16th September, 2010, vide which, the learned Magistrate has rejected the application filed by the petitioner for renewal of Passport. 3. The applicant is accused in criminal proceedings facing charges for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the IPC. The applicant is a brother of husband of the first informant. 4. While the applicant was released on bail, the learned Magistrate has imposed a condition that whenever the applicant goes abroad, he shall obtain prior permission from the Court. The said condition was challenged in Criminal Revision No. 31 of SM 2 907.wp.761.11 2008. The learned Revisional Court, by order dated 9th January, 2009, after taking into consideration that the applicant was working on ship and thereby , earning his livelihood, was required to go abroad, to set aside the said condition. 5. The applicant has placed on record a photocopy of the communication dated 25th June, 2011 to the Passport Officer requesting of urgent renewal of Passport. 6. Taking into consideration this aspect of the matter, and particularly that when the Revisional Court has itself set aside the condition of seeking permission to travel abroad, I find that the impugned orders are not sustainable in law. 7. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). 8. It is further clarified that the applicant shall file an undertaking before the Trial Court that after his contract period is over, he will remain present before the learned Trial Court and will give his full cooperation for disposal of the criminal case. (B. R. GAVAI, J.)