Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 assailing the orders granting permission to travel abroad and directing release of the passport deserved interference.
Analysis: The accused had sought permission to travel to Germany and produced a consular certificate assuring his return and compliance with the Court's directions. The Court accepted the certificate as credible and treated the foreign sovereign's undertaking as a strong assurance of the respondent's presence. The Court also noted that the bail had been granted treating the offence as bailable under Section 436 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and therefore the restraint on going abroad was not justified as if the matter were one under Section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Conclusion: The challenge to the orders permitting foreign and release of passport was rejected and the petition was dismissed.
Final Conclusion: The interim permissions granted by the trial court were sustained and no ground for interference was made out in exercise of inherent jurisdiction.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the accused furnishes credible assurance of return and the bail is granted in a bailable case, the Court will not ordinarily impose a travel restraint inconsistent with Section 436 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or interfere under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 absent infirmity in the order.