Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Anuj Keshwani S/O Sanjay Keshwani vs Union Of India And Anr on 27 February, 2026

2026:BHC-AS:10253                                                           919-IA-627-2026.DOC




                    Ajit Pathrikar



                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                     INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 627 OF 2026
                                                      IN
                                       BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2748 OF 2023

                    Anuj Keshwani S/o Sanjay Keshwani                            ...Applicant
                         Versus
                    Union Of India And Anr.                                      ...Respondents

                    Ms. Ashwinii Achari i/b Taraq Sayed, for the Applicant.
                    Ms. Manisha Jagtap, SPP for the NCB-Respondent No.1.
                    Ms. Megha Bajoria, APP for State-Respondent No.2.


                                               CORAM            DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.
                                               DATED:           27th FEBRUARY 2026
                    PC:-


1. The Applicant seeks modification of conditions (c) and

(g) of the order dated 9th November 2023. Conditions sought to be modified read thus:

"(c) The applicant shall attend the investigating officer of Narcotics Control Bureau, Mumbai Zonal Unit once in a fortnight on 1 st and 3rd Monday of each month between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m.
(g) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer."
Page 1 of 5

th 27 February 2026 ::: Uploaded on - 27/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 27/02/2026 22:46:06 ::: 919-IA-627-2026.DOC

2. Heard Ms. Ashwinii Achari, learned counsel for the Applicant, Ms. Manisha Jagtap, learned SPP for Respondent No.1-NCB and Ms. Megha Bajoria, learned APP for Respondent No.2-State.

3. Ms. Achari submits that there are 33 accused in the criminal case. All the accused are on bail. Out of them, 8 accused have been granted bail by the Trial Court. She submits that till date, the Applicant has complied with all the bail conditions and there is no complaint of violation from the Respondent. The charge-sheet is filed, however, charges are not framed till date. She submits that the Applicant is a businessman engaged in providing Airbnb services to tourists. For his business related activities, he is required to travel abroad. She further submits that the Applicant has complied with all the conditions imposed by the said order. Hence, she seeks return of the Applicant's passport.

4. Ms. Manisha Jagtap, learned SPP, on the other hand, contends that the Respondent-NCB has an objection to return Page 2 of 5 th 27 February 2026 ::: Uploaded on - 27/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 27/02/2026 22:46:06 ::: 919-IA-627-2026.DOC the passport. If the passport is returned and if he is granted permission to travel abroad without any condition, there is an apprehension that he may not return to India. She submits that the Applicant is complicit in a serious offence and hence, prays that the Interim Application be rejected.

5. At the very outset, I have perused the order dated 26 th September 2025, passed in the matter of the co-accused, Rhea Chakraborty, who had sought similar relief. Admittedly, by the said order the similar condition was relaxed. Furthermore, similar condition was relaxed for as many as 8 accused by the Trial Court itself. Undoubtedly, the Applicant, being a businessman, is required to travel abroad for work related reasons. It is an admitted fact that even as on date, the charges are not framed.

6. Since the said conditions have been relaxed for other 8 accused, I see no reason why the present Applicant be continued to be imposed with these conditions. Considering that the Applicant has co-operated with the trial till date; has Page 3 of 5 th 27 February 2026 ::: Uploaded on - 27/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 27/02/2026 22:46:06 ::: 919-IA-627-2026.DOC not been found violating any bail condition/s imposed on him and has always returned from abroad whenever he has travelled with permission from the Trial Court, I see no reason to doubt that the Applicant may not be available for the expeditious conclusion of the trial.

7. In view of the aforesaid, the Application is allowed. The conditions (c) and (g) are deleted. It is made clear that unless granted express exemption by the Trial Court, the Applicant shall appear before the Trial Court on each and every date and shall co-operate with the expeditious disposal of the pending trial. Before travelling abroad, the Applicant shall inform the Prosecuting Agency in that regard and furnish his complete itinerary to them, atleast four days before his departure. The itinerary must contain the details of his hotel and flights, which he intends to take. He is also directed to give his phone number to the Prosecuting Agency and keep his phone switched on at all times. He shall also intimate the Prosecuting agency on his return to India. Page 4 of 5

th 27 February 2026 ::: Uploaded on - 27/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 27/02/2026 22:46:06 ::: 919-IA-627-2026.DOC

8. Subject to the aforesaid conditions, the officers of the Prosecuting Agency are directed to return the passport to the Applicant within three days from the date of uploading of this order.

9. The Applicant is directed to attend the office of the Narcotics Control Bureau, Mumbai Zonal Unit once in every two months, on the first Monday of every second month, between 11:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m.

10. Rest of the order remains as it is.

11. The Interim Application is partly allowed and disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

(Dr. Neela Gokhale, J) Page 5 of 5 th 27 February 2026 ::: Uploaded on - 27/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 27/02/2026 22:46:06 :::