Milan Patel vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others Cr.MP No.4533 of 2025 in Cr.MP (M) No.362 of 2024 15.10.2025 Present Mr. Ashwani K. Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for the respondent-State. HC Brij Mohan, come present with the record. By way of instant application filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, permission has been sought by the applicant/petitioner to visit Dubai (UAE) for attending the seminar(s) and business collaboration from 24.10.2025 to 01.11.2025. Pursuant to the notice issued in the instant proceedings, respondent-State has filed status report, wherein afore prayer made on behalf of the applicant/petitioner has been opposed on the ground that in case petitioner is granted permission to travel abroad, there is every likelihood of his fleeing from justice and it may be difficult for the Investigating Agency to secure his presence during trial, which is pending adjudication before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalagarh, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh. Averments contained in the petition, which is duly supported by an affidavit, reveal that FIR No.14 of 2024, dated 02.02.2024, under Sections 285, 336, 337, 338, 304-A, 308, 304(II) of IPC and Section 92 of Factories Act, 1988 stands registered against the applicant/petitioner at police Station, Barotiwala, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh in connection with an unfortunate incident dated 02.02.2024, wherein an accidental fire broke out during day time in the premises of the factory, namely M/s N.R. Aromas engaged in the business of manufacturing perfumes, alcohol-free deodorants, rooms fresheners and other perfumery products situate at Baddi. Applicant/petitioner stands arrayed as an accused in the FIR, being Director/Partner of M/s N.R. Aromas. The other Directors/Partners namely Nilesh Patel and Sidharth Patel have been also arrayed as accused. After registration of the FIR, as detailed hereinabove, applicant/ petitioner approached this Court for anticipatory bail by way of Cr.MP(M) No.362 of 2024. Besides above, two accused, named hereinabove, also filed similar petitions, which were registered as Cr.MP(M) Nos.361 and 341 of 2024. This Court having taken note of record made available by the Investigating Agency, at first instance, granted interim bail, which subsequently came to be made absolute vide order dated 12.07.2024, thereby imposing following of conditions:- “a. they shall make themselves available for the purpose of interrogation, if so required and regularly attend the trial Court on each and every date of hearing and if prevented by any reason to do so, seek exemption from appearance by filing appropriate application; b. they shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; c. they shall not make any inducement, threat or promises to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or the Police Officer; and d. they shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court or I.O.” Since this Court specifically ordered that bail petitioner shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of this Court, applicant/petitioner, who is required to travel abroad for business purposes, has approached this Court in the instant application, seeking therein permission to go abroad. It is averred in the application that applicant/petitioner in his business connection is required to travel to Dubai for attending seminar(s) and industry specific trade related business, which are otherwise crucial for the applicant/petitioner’s ongoing international business development. To substantiate his aforesaid submission, he has placed on record invitation, received from the organizer at Dubai. Applicant/petitioner has also placed on record tentative itinerary of the travel as well as details of place of stay. Careful perusal of the status report filed by the respondent-State nowhere suggests that pursuant to order dated 12.07.2024 thereby enlarging the applicant/petitioner on bail, applicant/petitioner ever failed to make himself available for investigation before the Investigating Agency. There is nothing to suggest that he ever tried to influence/tamper with the prosecution evidence. In past also, similar permission to travel abroad in connection with business affairs was granted to the co- accused Sidharth Patel, who after travelling abroad reported to the police authorities and made himself available for investigation. Since it is quite apparent from the material adduced on record that applicant/petitioner is in the business of perfumery products and in that regard one conference/seminar is being organized in Dubai, coupled with the fact that in the past, he had been fully cooperating with the Investigating Agency and at present challan stands filed in the competent court of law, this Court sees no impediment in permitting the applicant/petitioner to travel abroad on the dates indicated in the application. Moreover, this Court finds that applicant/petitioner possesses substantial moveable and immoveable property in the State of Himachal Pradesh as well as other parts of the country and besides above, his other family members as well as business partners are very much present in India i.e. Ratlam, Madhya Pradesh. Consequently, in the view the above, the present application is allowed and applicant/petitioner is permitted to travel abroad w.e.f. 24.10.2025 to 01.11.2025, but before proceeding to Dubai, he shall make available complete details of his travel as well as stay at Dubai to Investigating Agency and in any eventuality, he would report back within a period of one week of his return to concerned police Station, failing which, police authorities would be at liberty to take appropriate action in accordance with law. The application stands disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma) Judge October 15, 2025 (shankar)