1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1662 OF 2009 Sunil Nilkanth Sathaye .. Petitioner V/s State of Maharashtra .. Respondents Mr.Shirish Gupte i/by Mr.K.J.Patil for the petitioner. Mr.V.B.Konde-Deshmukh, APP for the State. CORAM : SMT.RANJANA DESAI & R.G.KETKAR, JJ. DATE : 1ST JULY, 2009. P.C.: . Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith by consent of the parties. Applicant is the accused in CR No.219/2008 registered at Sangli City Police Station u/s.420 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The prosecution has registered an offence on the basis of a complaint lodged by Amol Arun Chowgule. It appears that a company by name, Quest Net, floated a scheme inviting people at large to buy certain products displayed on their website on payment of Rs.29,440/- and Rs.460/- as registration charges. As per the scheme the investors were also encouraged to bring six more investors/customers and if they do so it was declared that the company would pay them Rs.11,500/-. It appears that several persons invested in the said scheme and they also brought more customers and thereby earned profit from the scheme. The present petitioner is also one of such customers, who initially invested an amount of Rs,29,440/- and thereafter brought more customers and earned profits from the scheme. 2 2. The case of the complainant as told to us by Mr.Gupte inter alia is that he did not get the promised returns. On 9.4.2009 the learned Single Judge of this court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Petitioner was directed to report to the concerned police station on every alternate day between 10 a.m.and 12 noon till 30th April, 2009 and thereafter on every alternate Sunday between 12 a.m.and 12 noon till filing of the chargesheet. 3. We are informed by learned APP Mr.Konde-Deshmukh on instructions from Mr.Vijay Kumbhar, API attached to Local Crime Branch, Sangli, that the petitioner has meticulously followed the conditions imposed on him. It appears that the investigating officer has intimated to the Immigration Officers at the Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport, Mumbai8 and all other International Airports in India not to allow the petitioner to travel abroad, and the intimation to that effect was flashed at all the Airports in India. By this petition, it is prayed that a direction be given to the Immigration Officer, Local Crime Branch, Sangli to withdraw the said intimation. 4. We have heard Mr.Gupte, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner. Mr.Gupte submitted that the petitioner wishes to go to Dubai because he wants to renew his Vissa. He submitted that while the investigation was on, the petitioner had gone to Malasia and had returned to India. Mr.Gupte has shown us relevant entry to that effect in the passport of the petitioner. Petitioner left on 22.2.2009 and came back to India on 25.2.2009. Mr.Gupte submitted that in the circumstances, necessary directions be given as prayed for. 3 5. Mr.Konde-Deshmukh, learned APP states that Mr.Vijay Kumbhar, API attached to Local Crime Branch, Sangli, who is present before the court has no objection if such an order is passed by the court. He submitted that the petitioner should however attend the office of Local Crime Branch, Sangli on 5th July, 2009. 6. Mr.Gupte, learned Senior Counsel on instructions from the instructing Advocate Mr.Patil states that the petitioner shall report to the Local Crime Branch, Sangli on 5th July, 2009. 7. In view of concession made by Mr.Vijay Kumbhar, API attached to Local Crime Branch, Sangli we direct the investigating officer in CR No.210 of 2008, Local Crime Branch, Sangli to withdraw/remove the intimation of not to allow the petitioner to travel abroad given by him to the Immigration Officer at the Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport, Mumbai and all other International Airports in India, till 5th July, 2009, on the condition that the petitioner attends the Local Crime Branch, Sangli on 5th July, 2009. 8. Needless to say that after 5th July, 2009 the investigating officer will be entitled to issue fresh intimation to the Immigration Officer. 9. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. Petition is disposed of. ( SMT.RANJANA DESAI, J.) (R.G.KETKAR, J.)