Piyush Verma vs. State of Himachal Pradesh Cr.MP No.3693 of 2025 in Cr.MP(M) No.2190 of 2024 28.08.2025 Present Mr. Pankaj Negi, Advocate, for the applicant/ petitioner. Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for the respondent-State. Dy.SP Sh. Shakti Singh and ASI Gurwinder Singh, police Station West Shimla have come present alongwith the record. By way of instant application, prayer has been made on behalf of applicant/petitioner to permit him to visit Dubai w.e.f 30.08.2025 to 15.09.2025 and thereafter, w.e.f. 01.11.2025 to 20.11.2025 through private chartered plane and w.e.f. 29.12.2025 to 04.01.2026 through an International flight in business connection. During his visit at Dubai, his place of stay will be the house of his brother i.e. at Flat No. 201, Building C-402, Shabiya 10, Mussaffa, Abu Dhabi, UAE. It is averred in the application that since applicant/ petitioner is in the business of civil aviation, he is frequently required to travel abroad. Pursuant to order dated 25.08.2025, respondent- State has filed status report under the signatures of Additional Superintendent of Police, Head Quarter, Shimla, wherein afore prayer made on behalf of the applicant/petitioner has been opposed on the ground that despite repeated opportunities, applicant/ petitioner has not furnished relevant information as well as documents with regard to Windborne Air Pvt. Ltd. Company owned by the applicant/petitioner. In nutshell, case of the non-applicant/respondent/State is that the petitioner is not fully cooperating, rather on one pretext or other is avoiding interrogation. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, states that despite repeated notices, applicant/ petitioner is not coming forward for investigation, as a result whereof, Investigating Agency is finding it difficult to conclude the proceedings. While seriously refuting aforesaid plea of the learned Additional Advocate General, Mr. Pankaj Negi, learned counsel for the applicant/ petitioner, states that as and when petitioner was called, he not only made himself available, but also provided information whatsoever available with him. He further states that at present petitioner may be given permission to visit Dubai w.e.f. 30.08.2025 to 15.09.2025. Since it is not in dispute that in past similar permissions were granted to the applicant/petitioner, who after having visited destination not only reported to the police authorities, but also made himself available for investigation, there appears to be no impediment in accepting the prayer made in the application. No adverse report has been placed on record by the police suggestive of the fact that during his visit to Dubai or other stations, applicant/ petitioner indulged in illegal activities or attempted to tamper with the prosecution evidence. In view of the above, the present application is allowed and applicant/petitioner is permitted to visit Dubai w.e.f. 30.08.2025 to 15.09.2025, subject to his furnishing surety bonds in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- to the satisfaction of learned Deputy Registrar(Judicial)/ learned trial Court, with an undertaking to return India, in any eventuality 15.09.2025 and furnishing details of place of his stay during such visit and to report to Police Station concerned within three days, after 15.09.2025. (Sandeep Sharma) Judge August 28, 2025 (shankar)