Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

A division bench of the Bombay High Court comprising Justice GS Patel and Justice Neela Gokhale recently expressed displeasure over applicants fixing their itineraries before courts deciding their pleas to travel abroad and suspending Look Out Circulars. 

"We have previously expressed our displeasure at the manner in which these Applications are being made with Applicants finalizing their itineraries even before they seek leave of the Court. This is not a question of whether or not there is a right that is violated. In all these Applications it seems that Courts are more or less being taken for granted, that permissions will follow and that matters and, more importantly, that Applications will be taken up on a priority basis and even out of turn to permit the Applicants to keep to their itineraries. This is not acceptable. The parties seeking stay on any Look Out Circular (“LOC”) are required to apply to the Court in good time and not to attempt to pressurize the Courts," the court observed.

The court also remarked that last-minute applications are disruptive and the court staff is greatly inconvenienced.

"When last minute Applications are made like this, it is extremely disruptive. Our staff is greatly inconvenienced. Orders are to be drawn up after the order is passed, transcribed almost instantly, sometimes on the dais itself, then corrected, then signed and uploaded and we are supposed to believe that we are required to do this for a greater convenience of the Applicants, the disruption to Court being irrelevant. We will not entertain such Applications when they are made in this manner again. This is precisely what is happened in this case," the bench remarked.

The applicant had filed the application two days before their scheduled travel. Despite Advocate Halwasia, representing the Union of India, having filed a vakalatnama months ago, they had not received the necessary documents.

The court was given an excuse that Advocate Halwasia had failed to inform the petitioner's advocates, although the online system showed the vakalatnama had been filed. Nonetheless, an urgent order was requested, citing the petitioner's imminent departure that night.

The court declined the request. The next day, a new application was submitted, emphasizing the urgency due to a conference in New York where the petitioner held a prominent role and others had already made travel arrangements.

The court allowed the matter to be listed on a supplementary board but made it clear that costs would be imposed before any order could be granted to the petitioner.

The petitioner became aware of the LOC issued by the Union and CBI when he tried to travel out of India on 25th June 2022. 

The applicant submitted that he was not an accused in the CBI proceedings. There was no charge sheet against him and no charges had been framed. He submitted that he had been asked to submit documents and had been called as a witness. It was also pointed out that he had given his No Objection to attachment of some properties as mentioned in his reply of 29th September 2022 in other proceedings.

The applicant made an undertaking that not only he would return to India at the end of the month but also continue to cooperate with the CBI in further proceedings in the Special Court.

The court then allowed him to travel to the United States and certain cities there, until 3rd July 2023 and then to London until 7th July 2023. The LOC in question was stayed till 10th July 2023.

The division bench also imposed a cost of Rs. 50000 on the applicant.

"In addition, for the reasons set out above, we believe this is an appropriate case for imposition of costs. We quantify this cost Rs. 50,000/- payable to St. Jude India Childcare Centres. This cost must be paid before Monday, 26th June 2023. This order will dispose of the present Interim Application," the order reads.

Case title: Sanjay Dangi vs UOI