Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

AVINASH NIVRITTI BHOSALE S/O LATE NIVRITTI GANPATI BHOSALEversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ANR

Decided
Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The court held that the passport surrender condition should be scaled down to a reporting requirement and the personal appearance condition can be fulfilled by ensuring the advocate’s presence, while retaining the trial court’s authority to demand the applicant’s personal attendance.

Summary

The applicant, Avinash Nivritti Bhosale, filed an interim application seeking to scale down two bail conditions imposed on 17 May 2024. Condition No.49(vi) required surrender of his passport and prior permission for any foreign travel, which he argued was onerous for his business. The court, relying on its earlier decisions in Mohammad Hanif Nurani v. State of Maharashtra and Kirti Vishwanath Kedia v. CBI, modified the condition to require the applicant to furnish travel itineraries and contact details, allowing the passport to be returned. Condition No.49(vii) mandated his personal attendance at trial court hearings; the court permitted compliance through his advocate’s presence, subject to the trial court’s discretion to demand personal appearance. The interim application was therefore allowed and disposed with the revised directions.

Issues considered

  • Whether the passport surrender and travel permission condition in bail is unreasonably restrictive and can be modified.
  • Whether the requirement of personal appearance before the trial court can be satisfied by the presence of counsel.
  • Whether such modifications are permissible under established bail jurisprudence.

Subjects

  • bail
  • interim application
  • passport surrender
  • personal appearance
  • scaling down conditions
  • CBI
  • Bombay High Court
  • Criminal Procedure

Judgment

                                                                             19.IA.3833.2025.doc

HARSHADA H. SAWANT
      (P.A.)
                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                             INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3833 OF 2025
                                              IN
                               BAIL APPLICATION NO.2383 OF 2023

              Avinash Nivritti Bhosale                                  .. Applicant
              IN THE MATTER BETWEEN:
              Avinash Nivritti Bhosale                                  .. Org.Applicant
                         Versus
              Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr.                  .. Respondents
                                           .................…

               Mr. Aabad Ponda, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Amod Eklagpur, Mr.
                Abinash Pradhan and Mr. Yash Dedhia, Advocates i/by Wadia
                Ghandy & Co. for Applicant.
               Mr. Avadhut M. Chimalkar, SPP a/w. Mr. Tusshar Nirbhavne and
                Mr. Krishna Haritwal for Respondent No.1 – Central Bureau of
                Investigation (for short ‘CBI’).
               Ms. Sangeeta E. Phad, APP for Respondent No.2 – State.
                                              ...................

                                             CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
                                             DATE          : AUGUST 27, 2026
              P.C.:

              1.         Heard Mr. Ponda, learned Senior Advocate for Applicant;

              Mr. Chimalkar, learned SPP for Respondent No.1 – CBI and Ms. Phad,

              learned APP for Respondent No.2 – CBI.


              2.         Applicant has filed this Interim Application for seeking a

              scaling down condition Nos.49(vi) and (vii) appended at page No.51

              of the Application wherein bail order passed on 17.05.2024. Prima

              facie reading of these conditions persuade me to consider this

              Application since I cannot take contrary view of the issue which has


                                                                                         1 of 4
                                                                     19.IA.3833.2025.doc


been already taken by me in several similarly placed matter.


3.           The Applicant under condition No.49(vi) is required to

surrender passport every time before the Trial Court and before he has

to travel seek permission of the Trial Court and seek custody of his

passport.      This condition in my prima facie opinion is an onerous

condition especially where the Applicant is required to travel for

business interest or otherwise abroad every now and then.


4.           The decisions of this Court in the cases of Mohammad Hanif

Nurani Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.1 and Kirti Vishwanath

Kedia Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (EOB) and Anr. 2 squarely

cover the aforesaid request made by Applicant.                    I cannot take any

digressing view in the present matter and therefore the said condition

No.49(vi) is deleted / cancelled and / or been scaled down to the

effect that whenever Applicant has to travel abroad he will report or

give the details of the itinerary, with detail address, with details of his

stay abroad and return to the prosecution / CBI before he travels and

leaves the country. If there is any change in his mobile phone numbers

or address while being abroad, he shall furnish those details also on

email to the concerned IO.


5.           In that view of the matter, needless to state that his passport

shall be forthwith returned back to him by the Court / Authority on the

1    Criminal Application No.434 of 2024 decided on 05.02.2025.
2    ABA No.960 of 2022 decided on 22.08.2025.

                                                                                 2 of 4
                                                         19.IA.3833.2025.doc


basis of a certified copy of this order downloaded from the Bombay

High Court website.


6.        Needless to state that every six months he shall file a his

report of his travel plans, if any to the CBI in advance. In my opinion,

the aforesaid scaling down of condition No.49(vi) would suffice.


7.        The second condition i.e. 49(vii) requires the Applicant to

regularly attend the proceedings before the Trial Court in person. Mr.

Ponda would submit that said condition is onerous because it affects

the business and work of the Applicant.         He would submit that

Applicant is duly represented by Advocate and / or Counsel before the

Trial Court on every date and he undertakes to ensure that Applicant

shall keep his Advocate present on all dates before Trial Court. To that

effect, Applicant is directed to file an undertaking in this Court within

one week that he shall ensure the presence of his Advocate on every

date of hearing before the Trial Court. It is clarified that if the Trial

Court desires to have the presence of the Applicant on any particular

hearing date, the Trial Court shall be free pass appropriate order and

the Applicant shall thereafter remain present on that date.            The

aforesaid twin conditions Nos.49(vi) and (vii) as delineated in the this

order shall be read alongwith the order dated 17.05.2024 for

compliance.




                                                                     3 of 4
                                                                          19.IA.3833.2025.doc


               8.            With the above directions, Interim Application is allowed and

               disposed.



H. H. SAWANT                                              [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
                         Digitally signed
                         by HARSHADA
                HARSHADA HANUMANT
                HANUMANT SAWANT
                SAWANT   Date:
                         2026.08.27
                         17:17:42 +0530




                                                                                      4 of 4


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.