Bombay High Court
Anant Atmaram Mahajan vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 3 May, 2023
Bench: Bharati Dangre
1/3 22 IA 1554-23.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1554 OF 2023
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1136 of 2007
Anant Atmaram Mahajan .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors .. Respondents
...
Mr. Pritam R. Runwal for the appellant in Appeal.
Mr.Y.M. Nakhawa, APP for the State.
Mr.Ashish Chavan with Zishan Quazi and Manuj Borkar for
respondent nos.2 and 3.
CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J.
DATED : 3rd MAY, 2023
P.C:-
IA No.1555/2023
1 The present application is taken out by the applicant,
who has filed an Appeal against the judgment passed in ACB
Special Case No.42/2000 on 27/28 August 2007, under which
he stand convicted u/s.7 and Section 13(1)(d) r/w Section 13(2)
of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Upon conviction, he
is sentenced to suffer SI for two years on being convicted
{u/s.13(1)(d)} and on being convicted u/s.7 of the Act, Simple
Imprisonment of one year has been imposed along with penalty.
Tilak
2/3 22 IA 1554-23.doc
The sentences have been directed to run concurrently.
2 The Appeal filed in the year 2007, came to be
admitted on 2/11/2007 and the applicant has been released on
bail. Apart from this, he was also granted protection by
permitting to be retained in service.
3 By the present application, the applicant/appellant
seek a direction to issue passport to him, so that he can apply for
visa to travel abroad for a period of nine months. The application
proceed to state that the applicant's daughter on her marriage, is
residing in Australia and she is on her family way, and therefore,
the presence of the applicant along with his wife, is very much
necessary to take care of her. Accordingly, on 7/12/2022, he
applied to respondent no.3 on complying all the necessary
formalities and on submission of necessary documents for
availing the passport. However, he was informed that issuance of
the passport has been kept on hold in order to get the appropriate
order in terms of Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967.
Reliance is also placed upon the notification dated
25/8/1993, issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, which has
carved out an exception to Section 6(2)(f) in the cases where any
criminal prosecution is pending against the applicant, who is
desirous of obtaining a passport.
4 Learned counsel appearing for respondent nos.2 and
3 has no specific objection about grant of passport in favour of the
applicant.
Tilak
3/3 22 IA 1554-23.doc
5 Considering that the Appeal filed by the
applicant/appellant is admitted by this Court, in the year 2007
itself, and it has not been yet heard finally, and considering the
fact that the sentence imposed upon the appellant, on being
convicted under the impugned judgment is already suspended
and he has been released on bail, there appear to be no legal
impediment, in permitting him to travel abroad along with his
wife, in the wake of the exigency expressed in the Application.
This will be however, subject to all the necessary
compliances, which are contemplated by the Passport Authority
and which would contemplate submitting his itinerary, date of his
travel and date of his return and the contact number and the
address of the place where he is likely to reside in Australia.
6 Subject to the aforesaid compliance, the application
deserve to be allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). The Passport
Authority shall issue the passport for such duration, which is
permissible under the Passport Act and Rules.
Needless to state that once passport is issued, subject
to the other compliances, the applicant shall be permitted to
travel abroad.
( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.)
Tilak
