1 1 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.583 OF 2008 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1413 OF 2006 Abhishek Ambuj Kasliwal .. Applicant. Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr.Shirish Gupte, Senior Counsel i/b Khaitan & Jayakar for the applicant. Mrs.P.P.Shinde A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 29TH APRIL, 2009. DATED : 29TH APRIL, 2009. DATED : 29TH APRIL, 2009. P.C.: . Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. By this application the applicant is seeking relaxation of the condition of not entering the City of Mumbai as per the order dated 18.4.2006. This application was filed by the applicant in September, 2008. On 14th October, 2008, the following order was passed: "2. By this application the applicant is seeking relaxation of the condition of not entering the city of Mumbai, as per order dated 18th April, 2006, on such terms and conditions that this court deems fit and proper. By the order dated 18.4.2006 the applicant was released on bail subject to certain conditions as mentioned in paragraph 2 2 2 30 of the said order. The relevant conditions 30(I) (i), (ii) and (x) read thus: 30 (I) (i) "The applicant shall not enter the City of Mumbai during the pendency of the trial. (ii) As it is informed by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant during the course of arguments that the applicant’s parents have an establishment at New Delhi and the applicant is willing to stay there, the applicant to give his residential address at New Delhi including Noida and Gurgaon to the Superintendent of jail before he is released on bail. (x) Liberty is granted to the applicant to apply for relaxation of the condition of not entering the City of Mumbai after the charge-sheet is filed." 3. In view of the liberty granted to the applicant to apply for relaxation of the condition of not entering the city of Mumbai (for short, "the said condition") the applicant had filed Application No.444 of 2006. This court vide order dated 8th September, 2006, while rejecting the said condition, once again granted liberty to the applicant to apply afresh seeking relaxation of the said condition after three months. After three months, another application was filed by the applicant bearing Application No.117 of 2007. It appears that the prayer seeking relaxation of the said condition in that application was not pressed and the application was disposed of once again with the liberty to apply afresh seeking such prayer. The applicant had also filed one more application bearing No.695 of 2006 seeking permission of this court to travel abroad and that application was allowed. Further, it appears that one more application was filed by the applicant bearing No.407 of 2007 seeking similar prayer as made in the present application. However, that application was withdrawn in view of the fact that the trial was to commence on 31st August, 2007. 3 3 3 4. The respondent-State has filed reply affidavit opposing the prayer in the application contending therein that "the accused is highly influential person belonging to higher strata of the society and if he is allowed to enter the city of Mumbai it would be prejudicial to the interests of the prosecution". In the affidavit the prosecution has stated that so far the four panch witnesses have been examined and the last panch witness was examined on 16.6.2008. The cross examinatin of all the witnesses , however, has been deferred till examination of the complainant - prosecutrix is completed. 5. In this backdrop Mr.Gupte, learned senior counsel for the applicant placed on record the report dated 23.9.2008 made by the Commissioner of police, Greater Mumbai to the learned Judge, who is conducting the trial in Sessions Case No.671 of 2007. From the report it appears that the prosecutrix is not available, her whereabouts are not known and the police are making all possible efforts to find her out. The last communication with the prosecutrix by the Worli police station was made sometime in October, 2006 and thereafter they have been making all efforts to trace the prosecutrix and till this date their all efforts are in vain. In the last paragraph they have stated that they have formed two separate teams of the Worli police station to find her out under the supervision of D.C.P. Zone-III, Mumbai and the teams have proceeded towards Kolkata and Bangaluru, Karnataka. Their efforts are still in progress to trace the prosecutrix. Mr.Gupte, learned senior counsel submitted that the applicant, who has been staying away from his family since April, 2006, would like to spend time with his family in Mumbai during festive season. Keeping that in view and against backdrop of the facts mentioned above I am satisfied that at this stage the following order shall meet the ends of justice: Condition No.30(I) (i) and (ii) stands modified in the following terms: The applicant is allowed to enter the city of Mumbai for a period commencing from 20.10.2008 to 20.11.2008 subject to the condition that the applicant shall report to the concerned police station 4 4 4 on every Monday and Friday between 10.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. His prayer for relaxation of the said condition shall be considered on the next date of hearing. The respondents are directed to file report in this court regarding the efforts being made by them to trace the complainant on the next date of hearing. Stand over to 17.11.2008. 3. After the aforementioned order was passed this matter was adjourned from time to time to enable the police to trace out the whereabouts of the prosecutrix, however, till today the police have not been successful in tracing her address at any given place. There are several affidavits filed by the Investigating Officer stating as to what efforts they have made so far to trace the whereabouts of the prosecutrix. At this stage it is worth mentioning that the order dated 14th October, 2008, by which the applicant was allowed to enter the City of Mumbai for a limited period, he has not misused the liberty. Keeping that in view and having considered overall facts and circumstances of the case, in my opinion, this application cannot be kept pending any more and the interest of justice would be met by the following order: . Condition No.30(I) (i) and (ii) is modified in the following terms: 5 5 5 . The applicant is allowed to enter the City of Mumbai subject to condition that he shall report to the concerned police station on every Saturday between 10 am and 11 am. The applicant shall not make any effort, either direct or indirect, to tamper with the evidence. It is open to the prosecution to apply for imposing the same condition, as was imposed by the order dated 18th April, 2006, if they find it necessary and in the event, whereabouts of the prosecutrix are traced out by them. . With these observations the application is disposed of. (D.B.Bhosale, J.) (D.B.Bhosale, J.) (D.B.Bhosale, J.)