ROHIT HASAMBHAI RAJVANI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Kartik V.Pandya, learned advocate for the applicant stated that the offence which has been registered against the applicant is under Sec. 406 and 420 of the IPC and Sec. 10 and 16 of the Immigration Act. Mr. Pandya submitted that the accused holds a passport bearing No.3520425, which was issued on 29/2/2016 and the date of expiry would be 28/2/2016. He states that the applicant, because of his business purpose, would often travel foreign country. The pages of the passport issued got exhausted because of the endorsement made thereon, and thus stated that the passport stood cancelled, however, the VISA in favour of the applicant is valid and such endorsement is made on the passport.

(2.) Mr. Pandya stated that actually the applicant had made a prayer for the passport not for renewal on account of some expiry, but since passport so deposited before the trial Court got cancelled, as the pages of the passport were exhausted and for the purpose of renewal of the passport, the prayer was made before the trial Court. Mr. Pandya further stated that the learned trial Court has rejected the application stating that the applicant would not remain present before the trial Court, as he had married a foreigner and he proposes to go for training in a company at Singapore.

(3.) It is stated by Advocate Mr. Pandya that two FIRs have been filed against the applicant and stated that if at all passport is granted to the applicant, he may be in a position to get it renewed and any permission to travel foreign country be made subject to permission of the Court.