Bombay High Court
HARSHADA VIJAY SHEWALEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The court allowed the petition, permitting the petitioner to travel to Canada for up to two years subject to specified conditions.
Summary
Harshada Vijay Shewale filed a writ petition seeking to quash a Special Court order dated 29 September 2025 that restricted her travel to Canada until 3 December 2025, despite having obtained Canadian citizenship and a passport. The petitioner argued that she had complied with earlier orders dated 16 November 2021 and 20 November 2023 and that the travel restriction unduly hampered her employment prospects. The court examined the compliance submissions and noted that the petitioner was an accused (Accused No.3) in a CBI case, while her father was the principal accused. Finding no dereliction on the petitioner’s part, the court deemed it appropriate to modify the travel restriction on the same terms as the earlier orders. Accordingly, the court allowed the petition, permitting travel to Canada for up to two years, subject to a security deposit, periodic reporting, and other conditions, and disposed of the petition partially.
Issues considered
- Whether the Special Court's order restricting the petitioner's travel to Canada can be quashed or modified.
- Whether the petitioner has complied with the conditions of earlier orders dated 16 November 2021 and 20 November 2023.
- Whether the court can permit foreign travel for an accused in a CBI case subject to conditions.
Subjects
- travel restriction
- foreign travel
- CBI case
- writ petition
- criminal appellate jurisdiction
- security deposit
- compliance with court orders
- accused
Judgment
50-wp-5595-25.doc
Urmila Ingale
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 5595 OF 2025
Harshada Vijay Shewale .. Petitioner
Versus
Union of India .. Respondent
....................
Mr. Girish Kulkarni, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. Madhusudan Pareek,
for Petitioner.
Mr. Amit Munde, SPP a/w Mr. Jai Vohra, and Mr. Shantanu
Nakashe, for Respondent.
Ms. Rajeshree V. Newton, APP for State.
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : AUGUST 19, 2026
P.C.:
1. Heard Mr. Kulkarni, Senior Advocate for Petitioner and Mr.
Munde, learned SPP for contesting Respondent - CBI and Ms. Newton,
learned APP appearing for State.
2. The Petitioner has filed this Petition seeking direction to
quash and set aside the order dated 29.09.2025. By virtue of the order
dated 20.11.2023 passed by the Special Judge (CBI) of Sessions Court,
Mumbai in CBI Special Case No.943 of 2025, copy of which is
appended at Exhibit-D, page No.29 to the Petition order, the learned
Special Court has recorded that notwithstanding the permission
granted by this Court to her to resume her employment and visit
Canada since in view of the fact that she has obtained Canadian
1 of 4
50-wp-5595-25.doc
citizenship and Canadian passport. The said order restricted the travel
of the Petitioner to Canada upto 03.12.2025. Since the Petitioner was
in India, she was not able to travel and thereafter and hence the
present Petition is filed on 10.10.2025. Though it was filed much prior
to the said period before lapsing, Petition has seen light of the day
today.
3. Mr. Kulkarni in his usual fair mindedness has drawn my
attention to the order passed below Exhibit-67 by Special Court (CBI),
Greater Mumbai on 16.11.2021 and taken me through the same as
also the operative part. He would submit that the said order dated
16.11.2021 and the order dated 20.11.2023 have been duly complied
with by the Petitioner and there has not been a single dereliction
whatsoever. He would submit that the prospect of the Applicant qua
her employment needs to be therefore protected by this Court. He
would submit that it was not the Applicant but her father who is
arraigned as principal Accused in the Special Case.
4. After hearing Mr. Kulkarni and Mr. Munde and perusing the
material placed before me, I am of the opinion that the fair course of
action in the present case would be to pass an identical order to enable
the Applicant to permit to go to Canada on the same terms and
conditions as enumerated in the orders dated 16.11.2021 and
20.11.2023. Hence, the following order is passed:-
2 of 4
50-wp-5595-25.doc
(i) The Petition stands allowed to Petitioner who is
arraigned as Accused No.3 is permitted to travel
to Canada / abroad for a period of upto two years
from today;
(ii) Petitioner to deposit additional security of an
amount of Rs.50,000/- in the Special Court;
(iii) Petitioner to keep informed herself about the
proceedings in this case on the date-to-date basis;
(iv) Petitioner on return to India shall attend the
Court atleast once every six months during the
said period until actual commencement of trial;
(v) At the time of collecting passport, Petitioner shall
furnish on Affidavit her itinerary alongwith
detailed address of her residence in Canada, her
contact details, her phone numbers and in the
event of change in her address and phone
numbers, the same shall be communicated to the
Court as well as the CBI through email well in
advance firstly before proceeding and after going
to Canada if there is any change;
3 of 4
50-wp-5595-25.doc
(vi) Petitioner shall secure her presence through
Advocate;
5. In view of the above, the Petition shall stands allowed
partially and disposed.
Urmila Ingale [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed
by HARSHADA
HARSHADA HANUMANT
HANUMANT SAWANT
SAWANT Date:
2026.08.19
19:51:07 +0530
4 of 4
Checking your session…