Dr. Anil Kumar Henry v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRMP No. 1132 of 2019 • Dr. Anil Kumar Henry S/o Late Shri V.K Henry, Aged About 53 Years, Director Christian Mission Hospital, Mungeli Road, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh., District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Mungeli, Tahsil and District Mungeli Chhattisgarh., District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ----Respondent For Petitioner/applicant - Shri Kishore Bhaduri, Shri Azad Siddique and Shri Pankaj Singh, Advocates.

For Respondent/State - Shri I. Lakra, Deputy Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order on Board 09-05-2019 1.

This petition has been brought seeking permission of this Court for going abroad for a period of two months.

2.

It is submitted, that mother of the applicant is American citizen who resides in USA. She is 80 years old and she needs some medical attention. Apart from that, the daughter of the applicant is also studying in USA and convocation has to be held in the university where she is studying, within this month. Therefore, the applicant is required to go abroad to attend the medical treatment of his mother and also to attend convocation ceremony of his daughter, hence, it is prayed that he may be granted permission to go abroad for a period of two months.

3.

Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant opposes the application submitting that investigation is still not completed, therefore, the application may be rejected.

4.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused documents. 5.

In the order passed in M.Cr.C.(A) No.382 of 2017 dated 14-11-2017

-2specific condition was imposed that the applicant shall not leave this Country until and unless the investigation/trial in the case against him is completed. However, the liberty was granted that he may make a prayer before this Court in case he has a requirement to leave this Country for temporary period on account of some specific reasons.

6.

The application is supported with affidavit filed by the applicant himself. Considering that at present there is no specific requirement of presence of the applicant in the jurisdiction of the Court concerned, therefore, I feel inclined to allow this application.

7.

Consequently, the application is allowed, with a direction that the applicant shall furnish details of his itinerary to the concerned Court informing about the date of his departure and his destinations and that he shall report to the Court concerned on his arrival back to the Country. 8.

The petition stands disposed off.

9.

Certified copy today.

Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge Aadil