Bombay High Court

YASIN KASIM SHAIKHversusSTATE OF GOA THR CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION/ACB/GOA

Disposal: Disposed of
Bench: ASHISH S CHAVAN

Holding

The Court modified the bail order, deleting the restriction on leaving the jurisdiction and imposing passport deposit and other conditions to ensure the applicant's presence.

Summary

The applicant, Yasin Kasim Shaikh, sought modification of the bail order dated 30.04.2026, specifically challenging the condition that he could not leave the jurisdiction of the Court and the territory of India without prior permission. He argued that, being a permanent resident of Kolhapur, Maharashtra, the restriction would cause undue hardship and requested its deletion, offering to comply with alternative conditions. The CBI opposed the modification, contending that the restriction was essential to ensure the applicant's presence for the pending appeal and suggested that his passport be deposited with the Court. The High Court, after balancing the applicant's rights against the prosecution's concerns, modified the order by removing the jurisdictional restriction, directing the applicant to deposit his passport with the Court, and imposing other bail conditions such as a bond, surety, and a fine. The modified order was directed to be corrected in the original order and on the Court's website.

Issues considered

Whether the condition prohibiting the applicant from leaving the jurisdiction of the Court and the territory of India should be deleted.
Whether alternative conditions, such as passport deposit, are sufficient to secure the applicant's presence during the appeal.
Whether the High Court can modify bail conditions under the circumstances presented.

Subjects

bail
suspension of sentence
modification of bail conditions
passport deposit
jurisdiction restriction
criminal appeal
High Court

Judgment

                         906-CRMA-49-2026.DOC




Suchitra



             IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

              CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO.49/2026
                               IN
                 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.296/2026 (F)



  YASIN KASIM SHAIKH                             … APPLICANT

           Versus

  STATE OF GOA THR.
  CENTRAL BUREAU OF
                                                … RESPONDENTS
  INVESTIGATION/ACB/GOA


  Ms Vaibhavi Kanekar, Advocate for the Applicant.

  Ms Asha Desai, Special Public Prosecutor for Respondent CBI.


                       CORAM:          ASHISH S. CHAVAN, J.

                       DATE :          6th MAY 2026

  P.C.:

1.         An oral request is made on behalf of the Applicant/
Appellant to modify the Order dated 30.04.2026 passed by this
Court in Criminal Misc. Application No.297/2026 (F) (now
numbered as CRMA No.49/2026) inter alia suspending the
sentence against the Applicant/Appellant on the terms and
conditions set out in the said Order.


2.         Upon notice, learned Special Public Prosecutor for
Respondent No.1-CBI appears. Heard Ms Vaibhavi Kanekar for

                                 Page 1 of 4
                                6th May 2026
                         906-CRMA-49-2026.DOC




the Applicant/Appellant and Ms Asha Desai, learned Special
Public Prosecutor for Respondent No.1-CBI.


3.    Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the
condition at para 11(d) reads as under:

      “(d) he Applicant shall not leave the jurisdiction of this
      Court and the territory of India without the prior
      permission of this Court until the conclusion of the
      Appeal.”

4.    It is submitted that the Applicant/Appellant is a permanent
resident of Kolhapur, Maharashtra as relected in the cause title of
the Appeal. In view thereof, the condition that the Applicant
shall not leave the jurisdiction of this Court would not only cause
immense hardship to the Applicant/Appellant, but also would be
an onerous condition imposed by this Court.       In view thereof,
counsel for the Applicant prays that this condition may be
deleted.   She further submits that the Applicant/Appellant is
ready and willing to abide by alternative condition if any,
imposed by this Court.


5.    Learned Special Public Prosecutor for Respondent No.1-
CBI has opposed the prayer for modiication on the principal
ground that the objective of the bail condition is to secure
presence of the Applicant/Appellant and if the aforesaid condition
is deleted, there is an apprehension that the Applicant might
abuse the conditions of bail and not be available for the
proceedings of the Appeal. It is strenuously submitted by her that
                               Page 2 of 4
                              6th May 2026
                       906-CRMA-49-2026.DOC




interest of justice would be served if the passport of the
Applicant/Appellant is directed to be deposited with the Registry
of this Court as a condition precedent for suspension bail.


6.    Considering the rival submissions at the bar, in an efort to
strike a balance between the rights of the Applicant/Appellant, on
one hand, and the legitimate apprehension of the Respondent
No.1-CBI on the other, following modiication in the aforesaid
Order would serve the ends of justice.


7.    he operative part of the order is modiied in terms of the
following:
      (a) he sentence imposed by the Special Court, Principal
      Sessions Judge, North Goa vide order dated 09.02.2026 is
      suspended until the inal disposal of the Appeal subject to
      deposit of Rs.50,000/- towards the ine amount in the
      Special Court, Principal Sessions Judge, North Goa within
      a week from the date of this Order.

      (b) he Applicant is directed to be released on bail on his
      executing P. R. Bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the
      like amount to the satisfaction of the Special Court,
      Principal Sessions Judge, North Goa within four weeks
      from the date of this Order.

      (c) he Applicant shall inform the place of his residence
      to the Registry of this Court with valid proof thereof and
      report any changes in the same immediately with
      appropriate proof.
                              Page 3 of 4
                             6th May 2026
                                                         906-CRMA-49-2026.DOC




                                        (d) he Applicant shall not leave the territory of India
                                        without prior permission of this Court till the conclusion of
                                        the Appeal.

                                        (e) he Applicant to deposit passport, if any, with the
                                        Registry of this Court.

                                  8.    he Order dated 30.04.2026 stands modiied in the
                                  aforesaid terms. Necessary corrections to be carried out in the
                                  original order as well as in the order uploaded on the website.



                                                                         ASHISH S. CHAVAN, J.




Signed by: SUCHITRA NANDAN                                      Page 4 of 4
SINGBAL
                                                               6th May 2026
Designation: Personal Assistant
Date: 06/05/2026 16:13:16

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…