Bombay High Court
DR PRATEEK KANAKIAversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The condition is modified to allow the petitioner to leave the Court's jurisdiction upon giving prior notice of his travel details to the Investigating Officer and cooperating with the investigation.
Summary
The Bombay High Court considered an interim application filed by Dr. Prateek Kanakia seeking relaxation of the condition that he remain within the Court's jurisdiction after his release ordered on 24 February 2026. The petitioner argued that he needed to travel across India for business and to attend a Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act case in Delhi, while not seeking to relax the condition prohibiting him from leaving the country. The respondents feared he might tamper with evidence or dispose of property under investigation if he left the jurisdiction. The Court held that the risk could be mitigated by imposing procedural safeguards, and therefore modified the condition to permit travel provided the petitioner informs the Investigating Officer of his itinerary and cooperates with the investigation. The interim application was consequently disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the condition requiring the petitioner to remain present within the jurisdiction of the Court can be relaxed in view of his need to travel for business and to attend a related criminal case
Legislation cited
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — s. 138
Subjects
- interim relief
- release order
- jurisdiction restriction
- travel permission
- evidence tampering
- Negotiable Instruments Act
- Section 138
- investigation cooperation
Judgment
16-ia-1861-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1861 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 1823 OF 2026
Dr. Prateek Kanakia ...Applicant
Versus
The Directorate of Enforcement & Anr. ...Respondents
Mr. Adithya R. Iyer a/w Mr. Advait Helekar, Mr. Vijit Shinde and Mr.
Veertaj Patil for the Applicant.
Ms. Supriya Kak, A.P.P for the Respondent-State.
Dr. Nilesh V. B. Pawaskar (through VC) a/w Ms. Aparna D. Vhatkar
for the Respondent No.1 – E.D.
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL &
ASHISH S. CHAVAN, JJ.
DATE : 2nd JULY, 2026
P.C. :
1. This is an interim application in Writ Petition (ST) No.
1823 of 2026. The Division Bench headed by the Hon’ble the Then
Wakodikar 1/6
16-ia-1861-2026.doc
Chief Justice vide order dated 24th February, 2026, directed release
of the Applicant/Petitioner forthwith in connection with ECIR
bearing No.MBZO-II/14/2024 dated 25th October, 2024 registered by
the Respondent No.1. The main operative part of the said order are
in paragraph Nos.8 and 9 as follows :
“8. Consequently, we hereby hold that the arrest of
the petitioner on 5th January, 2026 was illegal. The
impugned remand orders dated 6th January, 2026 and 9th
January, 2026 are set aside. The petitioner shall be
released forthwith on production of a certified copy of
this order and on his filing an affidavit in the Court
concerned that he shall not tamper or attempt to tamper
evidence, shall not influence or attempt to influence the
witnesses and shall remain present within the
jurisdiction of this Court at all times and shall not leave
the country without prior permission of this Court.
9. The petitioner shall deposit his passport with the
concerned Court.”
2. The present application is filed for modification of
paragraph No.8 and in particular, the Applicant wants relaxation of
the condition directing him to remain present within the jurisdiction
of this Court at all time.
Wakodikar 2/6
16-ia-1861-2026.doc
3. At the outset, learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted
that he wants relaxation of only that condition. He does not want
relaxation of condition whereby he was directed not to leave the
country without prior permission of this Court. He submitted that
the petitioner does not have a passport and he has no intention to
travel abroad. Therefore, he is not seeking relaxation of that
condition. However, he wants relaxation of the condition which
directs him to remain present within the jurisdiction of this Court.
Learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted and it is also mentioned
in the application that he is engaged in business activities which
necessitates travel to various parts of India. He also visits various
places for pilgrimages in India. He is shown as an accused in the
case arising out of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,
1881 before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Patiala House,
New Delhi, in C.C.NI Act 29212 of 2024. He is required to attend
that Court in Delhi. For all these reasons, he requires relaxation of
Wakodikar 3/6
16-ia-1861-2026.doc
the condition not to leave the jurisdiction of this Court.
4. Learned Counsel Dr.Nilesh Pawaskar appearing for the
Respondent No.1 relied on the affidavit-in-reply filed by them. The
same is taken on record. The reply mentions various aspects on
merits of the matter. However, the scope of the application is quite
limited. The Division Bench in the order dated 24 th February, 2026
had given clear directions to release the Applicant forthwith in
connection with the subject matter. Therefore, we are only
considering whether we should relax the aforesaid condition.
5. We find force in the submission of the learned Counsel for
the Applicant that he is required to leave the jurisdiction of the Court
particularly for attending the Court case in Delhi. The learned
Counsel for the Respondent No.1 expressed apprehension that if he
leaves the jurisdiction of this Court, then he may tamper with the
evidence and in particular may dispose of the property, which is the
Wakodikar 4/6
16-ia-1861-2026.doc
subject matter of the investigation.
6. We have considered both these submissions. As far as
apprehension expressed by the Respondent No.1 is concerned, it can
be taken care of by imposing suitable conditions so that the Applicant
furnishes all the necessary contact details and the purpose of travel
outside of this Court’s jurisdiction to the Investigating Officer. In
that view of matter, we are inclined to modify that condition on
further directions as follows :
: ORDER :
The order dated 24th February, 2026 is modified to a
limited extent and the condition imposed on the Applicant
to remain present within the jurisdiction of this Court at
all times is modified as follows :-
(i) The Applicant is permitted to leave the jurisdiction
of this Court provided that before he leaves the
jurisdiction of this Court, he shall give the information of
his proposed visit with necessary contact details and the
Wakodikar 5/6
16-ia-1861-2026.doc
purpose of visit, to the Investigating Officer atleast a week
before he is leaving the jurisdiction of this Court.
(ii) The Applicant shall co-operate with the
investigation in future.
7. With these observations, the interim application is
disposed of.
(ASHISH S. CHAVAN, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
Wakodikar 6/6
Checking your session…