Bharat Mehra Through His C.A. Shraddha Khandhadia v. Haresh Gurbaux Daulatani Partner Of M/S Shree Tirupati Greenfiled Developers And ANR
Vidya Amin.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 539 OF 2019 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 540 OF 2019 Kamal Khandhadia through daughter and C.A. Shraddha Khandhadia ...
Petitioner vs.
Haresh Gurbaux Daulatani, partner of M/s. Shree Tirupati Greenfield Developers and ...
Respondents WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 541 OF 2019 Bharat Mehra through his C.A. Shraddha Khandhadia ...
Petitioner vs.
Haresh Gurbaux Daulatani, partner of M/s. Shree Tirupati Greenfield Developers and ...
Respondents WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 542 OF 2019 Shraddha Khandhadia ...
Petitioner vs.
Haresh Gurbaux Daulatani, partner of M/s. Shree Tirupati Greenfield Developers and ...
Respondents Mr. S.K. Dubey, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Aditya Andhorikar, Advocate for respondent No. 1. Ms. Veera Shinde, APP for respondent/State.
CORAM: Mrs.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.
DATED: 8th March, 2019 P.C. :
In all these four Writ Petitions, same prayer is made for
quashing and setting aside the order dated 25th January, 2019 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate in four criminal cases wherein the respondent/accused is facing charges under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act. This pertains to seeking four monthly permission to go abroad.
2.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted the petitioner is a original complainant, who has filed four cases and the process is issued against the respondent under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act. This Court by order dated 4th December, 2018 has given permission to respondent/accused to visit Dubai time to time for which a permission can be obtained after four months from the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate. It is submitted by the learned counsel that while seeking permission, it is necessary for the respondent/accused to give his itinerary and he should abide himself to the schedule.
3.
The learned counsel for the respondent/accused submitted that when the permission was sought from the learned Magistrate in February, a schedule of the visits to Dubai was given to the learned Metropolitan Magistrate and the respondent/accused shall
not violate the schedule or itinerary given by the respondent/accused to the learned Magistrate. 4.
In view of these submissions, as the respondent/accused wants to stick to the schedule or itinerary given by him to the learned Magistrate, no order is required to be passed. 5.
With this, all the Writ Petitions are disposed of. (MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)