1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 437 OF 2009 IN CRI. APPLICATION NO.3674 OF 2008. WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 726 OF 2009 IN CRI. APPLICATION NO.3905 OF 2008. (GIRDHARILAL SOHANLAL AGRAWAL.. Vs.. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR.PSO HINGNA.) _______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders. ______________________________________________________________________________ Shri Shri Anil Mardikar & A.M.Rizwy, Advocates for Applicant. Shri A.M..Deshpande, A.G.P. for Respondent/ State. Shri Shyam Dewani, Advocate for Complainant. CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATED : APRIL 23, 2009. 1. One Giridharilal Agrawal, who had been admitted to bail by orders in Criminal Applications No. 3905 of 2008 and 3674 of 2008 has filed these applications for relaxation of the condition which requires him to keep himself outside Nagpur district. In both the orders passed the applicant had been given 2 liberty to apply for modification of the conditions after chargesheet is filed. 2. As far as Criminal Application No.437 of 2009 is concerned, it is stated that chargesheet in respect of the crime is not yet filed. 3. The applicant was directed to keep himself outside Nagpur district and was given liberty to apply for modification of the conditions after the chargesheet is filed with the object that he should not be able to tamper the investigation. Once the investigation is over, and statements of witnesses have been recorded and the matters are before the Court, there would be sufficient guarantee of the applicant being put to fair trial. Therefore, though, the offence for which the applicant is arrested in Crime No.115/2008 is one punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471 read with Sections 34 and Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, in order to ensure that the investigation is not tampered the 3 applicant would have to abide by the conditions. Therefore, Criminal Application No.437 of 2009 is rejected as premature. This, however, does not mean that the Investigating Officer would materially conduct the investigation at his leisure. If the investigation is not complete within a period of three months the applicant may apply again for relaxation of the condition. 4. As far as Criminal Application No.726 of 2009, arising out of Criminal Application No.3905 of 2008, is concerned, the complainant has filed an elaborate objection to the applicant's being permitted to enter Nagpur district. 5. Since, in this case, investigation is over and chargesheet has already been filed, it would not be appropriate to prevent the applicant from entering Nagpur district. The contention that the applicant had been externed and his externment order was maintained up to the Supreme Court, cannot be of any help in 4 seeking applicant's externment as a part of condition on which he had been bailed out. If there are grounds for externing the applicant, even now, the authorities concerned would take necessary steps. The object of asking the applicant to remain away from Nagpur district till chargesheet was filed was to ensure fair investigation which object having been achieved, the condition that the applicant shall not enter Nagpur district, imposed by order dated 17th November, 2008 in Criminal Application No.3905 of 2008 is relaxed. The applicant may enter Nagpur district, if not restrained in any other case and shall report at Police Station, Hingna-M.I.D.C. every Sunday at 10.00 a.m. till the trial is over. The applications are disposed of accordingly. JUDGE RR.