The High Court · 2025

ORDER IHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI cRt MINAL PETITION No.8343 OF 2025 This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 483('1 ) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter 'the BNSS') seeking to temporarily relaximodify the condition imposed vide order dated 21 .04.2A23 in Crl.lvl.P.No. 768 of 2023 in S.C.No. 16 of 2023 on the file of the learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court under PMLA. Nampaliy, Hyderabad. 2 The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.l in the aforementioned Sessicrrs Case which pertains to the offence defined under Section 3, lr.rnishable unrJer Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2C02 (hereinafter'P|illA,2002') read with Sections 70(1) & 70(2) o{ PM!_A.2CO2 3 I have neard Mr.Enuganti Sudhanshu Rao, learned counsei for tlre petrlioner and Mr.V.T.Kalyan. learned Special Public Prosecutor, representing tre :espondent-Directorate of Enforcement 4 The relevant facts. briefly stated. are that, the petitioner, ai'rayed as accusei Nr: i rvas arrested on26.09.2022. Subsequently, by order dated 2C.04.20?3 in Criminal Appeal No. 1198 of 2023, the Hon'ble Supreme Co:.r( granted bail to the petitioner. As part of the bail i I I I ! 2 N',71{./ Cr/.I'.itt E )$ crl 2025 { conditions, the petitioner was directed to surrender his passport, in addition to complying with any other conditions that the Special Court might impose. ln compliance with the order, the petitioner duly surrendered his passport. Thereafter, he filed Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 768 o'f 2023 before the Special Court, seeking his release, and the Special Court granted bail by order dated 21 04 2023. fhe conditions imposed by the Court included: (i) the petitioner must appear before the Court on all hearing dates; (ii) he shall not leave lndia without prior permission of the Court; and (iii) he must furnish two sureties, each in the amount of Rs.2,00,0001. Subsequently, the petitioner filed an application seeking temporary relaxation of the condition restricting travel abroad. Specifically. he sought permission to travel to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) for a period of three months and requested the return of his passport for this purpose. The Special Court, however, dismissed the application, notang that the Supreme Court had previously barred the petitioner from leaving lndia due to concerns regarding flight risk. Aggrieved by this crder the petitioner approached the Hon'ble Suprerne Court by ftling Miscellaneous Application No. 66 of 2024. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, vrde order dated 16.01 .2024, liberty was granted to the petitioner to file a fresh application before the trial Court seeking permission to travel abroad The Court expressly stated that such application should be consrdered - 3 Nr&/ Cr/.P.No. 8)1) o12025 on its own merits, uninfluenced by the earlier direction concerning the surrender of the passport. Pursuant to the Supreme Court's order, the petitioner filecl Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 331 of 2024, seeking release of his passport and permission to travel abroad and the same was also stood dismissed.

5. ln the meantime, the predicate offence forming the basis for the initiation of ECIR proceedings was closed by order dated 02.01.2025, pursuant to the filing of a final report by the investigating police authorities, which stated that no incriminating evidence was found. ln light of this development, the petitioner filed a Writ Petition seeking quashment of all further proceedings in the Sessions Case. Consequently, this Hon'ble Court granted a stay of all further proceedings in Sesslons Case No. 16 of 2023. Following the stay order, the petitioner filed a fresh application before the trial Court seeking temporary relaxation of the bail conditions, specifically requesting permission to travel to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) for a period of three months. The petitioner contended that, since all further proceedings in the Sessions Case had been stayed, there existed no iegai impediment to permitting his travel. However', as the said application is not being considered by the trial Court. the petitioner has approached this Court through the present , petiiion. seekrng temporary relaxation or modification of the bail I i/ / /1 I l r i , { 4 ,\7R.rt Cr/.P.No. 8)11 ol 2025 conditions. The relief sought includes permission to travel abroad to the UAE for a period of three months and a direction that, upon his return to lndia, the petitioner shall surrender his passport in accordance with the terms as may be stipulated by the Court

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in view of the closure of the predicate offence and the stay of proceedings in the Sessions Case as granted by this Court, the petitioner ought to be permitted to travel abroad by way of temporary relaxation of the bail conditions, as prayed for in the present petition. However, learned counsel fairly concedes that an application seeking the same relief is already pending consideration before the Special Court. ln that context, he submits that a direction for expeditious disposal of the said application by the Special Court would adequately address the petitioner's present grievance.

7. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the petrtioner has already filed a similar application before the trial Court. which is presently pending. Therefore, present petition amounts to simultaneous invocation of multiple jurisdictions for identical relief, which renders it legally unsustainable and not maintainable

8. I have perused the materials on record r NT&/ CrLP.No. $43 of 2025

9. lt is an admitted fact that the petitioner has already filed a petition before the Special Court seeking the very same relief, which is currently pending consideration. The filing of the present petition, therefore, amounts to seeking the same relief before a different forum, resulting in the invocation of parallel jurisdiction. ln these circumstances, the petitioner is directed to pursue the remedy available before the trial Court in the pending petition. The Special Court is, accordingly, directed to consider the said petition on its own merits and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.

10. With these directions, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Pending nriscellaneous applicatrons, if any, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// Sd/- V, KAVITHA PUTY REGISTRAR + $ECTION OFFICER To, 1 . The Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad 2. One CC to SRl. ENUGANTT SUDHANSHU RAO Advocate tOpUCl 3. Two CCs to SRt V T KALYAN, SpL. pUBLtC PROSECUTOi1, High Court at 4. Two CD Copies Hyderabad (OUT) VSM&am HIGH COURT DATED:2310712025 i i i I , I I ! I I I I z C' .5 3s ttl Mi "q ORDER CRLP.No.8343 ot 2025 DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION (A- (o .1--\ 6 @