BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Abbas_Hatimbhai_Kagalwala_vs_The_State_Of_Maharashtra_And_Anr_on_23_August_2022

Abbas Hatimbhai Kagalwala … Petitioner
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra and Anr. … Respondents
——————-
Mr. Vivek Kantawala a/w Amey Patil i/b M/s Vivek Kantawala & Co., for
the Petitioner.
Mr. D.P. Singh, for Respondent No.2.
Smt.Uma Palsuledesai, AGP for State.
———————
CORAM :S.V. GANGAPURWALA &
MADHAV J. JAMDAR, JJ.
DATED :23rd AUGUST 2022

MUMBAI: Observing that the permission of a court where a criminal case is pending is not required for renewal of a passport, the Bombay high court directed the regional passport office to process a man’s application without insisting on it.

2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that for renewal of the Passport, permission from the Court where a criminal case is pending against the Petitioner, is not necessary. If a criminal case is pending, then the only limitation would be, the Petitioner can not travel abroad without the permission from the Court where a criminal case.

It is the case of the Petitioner that validity of the Passport came to an end in the year 2017. The Petitioner applied for renewal and said application is pending for more than 4 years. It is also a fact that a criminal case is pending against the Petitioner u/s 420, 465, 467 r/w 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.

. Court observes that the fact that petitioner is already issued a Passport earlier and the Petitioner would be seeking renewal of the Passport and the said application is pending with the Respondent, so also, considering the Order passed by the Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No.1342/2017 (supra) court pass the following order.

i) The Respondent shall process the application of the petitioner for renewal of Passport without insisting for permission of the Court, where a criminal case is pending against the Petitioner. If the Petitioner is travelling abroad, then the Petitioner would be required to seek permission from the Court where criminal case is pending.
ii) Decision shall be taken as observed above, within 2 months.
iii) The impugned communication is quashed and set aside.
iv) If as per procedure on-line application is required to be made, the same shall be made by the
Petitioner

[ DELHI HIGH COURT ]Lekh_Raj_Sharma_vs_Yash_Pal_Gupta_on_30_June_2015

Lekh Raj Sharma vs Yash Pal Gupta CRL-LP 567/14 [ Vipin Sanghi JJ ]

NI ACT Section 138 r/w Section 139 Criminal Trial Dishonour of Cheque Presumption Presumption qua issuance of chque for consideration, based upon Pronote Failure of accused respondent to rebut the presumption Not only, there appeared contradiction in statements of respondent accused and DW-1 qua amount returned to complainant, but also testimony of DW-1 found to be unbelievable Accused respondent shield away from facing cross examination This factor discredits the defence If cheque purportedly handed over to complainant-appellant in blank, purpose was to enable appellant to encash it, in the event loan was not repaid Thus, there was an implied authority to complainant appellant to fill up cheque and encash it Once pronote has been signed and executed by respondent admittedly, it acts as an acknowledgement of transaction It is in dark as to why two pronotes had been executed in blank Rejecting all pleas, impugned order set-aside Ordered accordingly. [Paras 2 to 5, 15, 19 to 22, 26 & 27]

file:///C:/Users/admin/Documents/Downloads/Lekh_Raj_Sharma_vs_Yash_Pal_Gupta_on_30_June_2015.PDF

        [ MADRAS HIGH COURT ]

Mr.S.Karunakaran vs Ms.Srileka AS 292/19 [ SATHISH KUMAR JJ ]

Hindu Marriage Act, Section 8 Information Technology Act Section 2 Marriage Validity Mere registration under section 8 of the Hindu Marriage Act will not give any sanctity in the eye of law Relationship of the plaintiff and the defendant during the college days and the fact that the plaintiff is in adolescent age who hass just attained majority and the defendant is in a dominant position to dominate her will and the solemnization of marriage not being proved Email correspondences between the plaintiff and the defendant By mere filing of email, it cannot be said that those emails have been proved as per law.

adv Vaibhav Tomar

file:///C:/Users/hp/Downloads/Mr_S_Karunakaran_vs_Ms_Srileka_on_21_March_2019%20(1).PDF

Premature redemption under Sovereign Gold Bond (SGB) Scheme – Redemption Price for premature redemption due on November 25, 2022 (November 26 and November 27, 2022 being Saturday and Sunday respectively) (SGB 2017-18 Series IX) In terms of GOI Notification F.No.4(25) – W&M/2017 dated October 06, 2017 (SGB 2017-18 Series IX – Issue date November 27, 2017) on Sovereign Gold Bond Scheme, premature redemption of Gold Bond may be permitted after fifth year from the date of issue of such Gold Bond on the date on which interest is payable. Accordingly, the first due date of premature redemption of the above tranche shall be November 25, 2022 (November 26 and November 27, 2022 being Saturday and Sunday respectively).

2. Further, the redemption price of SGB shall be based on the simple average of closing gold price of 999 purity of previous three business days from the date of redemption as published by the India Bullion and Jewellers Association Ltd (IBJA). Accordingly, the redemption price for premature redemption due on November 25, 2022 (November 26 and November 27, 2022 being Saturday and Sunday respectively) shall be `5255/- (Rupees Five thousand two hundred fifty-five only) per unit of SGB based on the simple average of closing gold price for three business days i.e.,November 22, 23 and 24, 2022.

Press Release: 2022-2023/1251 Director (Communications): Rupambara