The Court of the LXVIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH-69), presided over by Sri Sabappa, B.Com., LL.B. (Spl.), delivered a judicial order on April 6, 2024, allowing a petition filed under Section 439(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.). The ruling in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2941/2024 granted a relaxation of bail conditions for the petitioner, Vishwanath Jalamana Madom, in connection with an earlier order passed in Crl. Misc. No. 742/2024 dated February 6, 2024, arising from a case registered by the Pulakeshi Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru.

Factual Background and Modification Request

The petitioner was earlier enlarged on bail by the Sessions Court in Crl. Misc. No. 742/2024 on February 6, 2024, subject to various conditions. Condition No. 6 of the said order prohibited the petitioner from leaving the jurisdiction of Bengaluru City without prior permission from the court.

Seeking a relaxation of this restriction, the petitioner—a 29-year-old tax practitioner—approached the court through his counsel, Ms. Nimmy K.S., submitting the following grounds:

• Professional Hardship: The petitioner runs a professional practice under the name “VJ Solutions” in Kerala and is solely dependent on the income generated from it for his livelihood and sustenance.
• Family Responsibilities: His wife and aged parents reside in Kerala. Because his parents suffer from multiple health complications, the petitioner serves as their primary caretaker, requiring his physical presence in Kerala to oversee their medical needs.
• Cooperation with Investigation: The petitioner contended that he has consistently cooperated with the investigating officer, that the final charge sheet has not yet been filed, and that the travel restriction has left him unable to earn or properly support his family. He undertook to make himself available for police interrogation as and when required and to comply with all other procedural safeguards.

Prosecution Objections

The learned Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the petition, contending that the petitioner had voluntarily agreed to abide by all terms and conditions at the time bail was originally granted, thereby forfeiting grounds for modification. The prosecution argued that relaxing the territorial jurisdiction condition could create a risk of abscondence, making it difficult to secure his presence for the final report or subsequent trial.

Judicial Reasoning and Order

Upon evaluating the rival submissions, the court observed that the petitioner had substantiated his status as a resident of Kerala through documentary evidence, including identity documents and medical records pertaining to his parents’ health conditions. The Sessions Judge noted that balancing the necessity of securing the accused for investigation with genuine personal and professional hardships warranted a relaxation of the travel constraint.

Answering Point No. 1 in the affirmative, the court passed the following order:

• The petition filed by the petitioner under Section 439(1)(b) of Cr.P.C. is hereby ALLOWED.
• Condition No. 6 is relaxed, and the petitioner is permitted to travel to Kerala.
• The petitioner is explicitly directed to continue cooperating fully with the Investigating Officer for the purposes of the investigation whenever called upon.