Nitesh Chugh vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Heard finally with the consent of parties.

This is a petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C challenging the order dated 31.05.2018 passed by XIIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Indore passed

in Sessions Trial No.296/2017, whereby the applicant's application dated 28.05.2018 seeking permission to go abroad has been rejected.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is facing the aforesaid trial under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 and 120-B of IPC and

was released on bail on 29.06.2016. In the order of the learned Trial court it was also directed that the applicant shall not leave India without

permission of the court. Since the applicant seeks to go out of India for a period of 15 days i.e. from 06-16 June, 2018, the application was filed by the

applicant seeking permission for the same before the learned Trial Court.

It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the aforesaid application has been dismissed by the learned Trial Court without

assigning any reasons.

Learned counsel has submitted that the applicant was released on bail on 29.06.2016 and since then he is enjoying the liberty and has not misused the

same. It is only when the applicant has to travel abroad for the period of 15 days only, the application has been filed by the applicant. He has further

submitted that the applicant is having assets in Indore and there is no likelihood of his running away from the course of justice. It is further submitted

that the applicant is traveling along with his wife and two sons and has already purchased the return tickets which is available on record.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State has submitted that the applicant traveling abroad appears to be one for pleasure only and

no reason has been assigned in the application to travel abroad and has submitted that in such circumstances the petition is liable to be rejected and no

illegality has been committed by the learned Trial Court.

After considering the rival submissions of both the parties, this Court is of the opinion that the learned Trial Court has not assigned any specific

reasons for denying the permission to the applicant to travel abroad, especially when the applicant was already released on bail in the year 2016.

There was no compelling reasons to deny him the aforesaid facility to travel abroad.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the petition stands allowed. The impugned order is hereby set aside and the application filed by

the applicant to travel abroad is hereby allowed.

Since the applicant is due to return on 16.06.2018, it is directed that the applicant shall report before the learned Trial Court on 19.06.2018 failing

which the State may apply for cancellation of applicant's bail and to take other appropriate remedial steps against the applicant.

With the aforesaid, the present petition stands allowed and disposed of.