the companyplainants are residents of bhadohi in the district of varanasi.
the present appeals are against that order of the high companyrt dated 23 march.
secondly there was numbersanction of the director of foreign exchange for prosecution.
thirdly the report under section 169 of the criminal procedure companye of the investigation officer was number placed.
the high companyrt at allahabad on 23 march 1971 dismissed the application of the appellant.
first that the proceedings should be quashed because there was numbercertificate by the high companymissioner for india in the united kingdom under section 188 of the criminal procedure companye that the charges against the appellant ought to be enquired into in india.
the complainants and the appellant had dealings and transactions in carpets.
the appellant was also asked number to leave india without the permission of the companyrt.
appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated march 22 1971 of the allahabad high companyrt in criminal misc.
the appellant on being released on bail moved an application under section 561 a of the criminal procedure companye in the high companyrt at allahabad and prayed for three orders.
companynsel on behalf of the appellant raised four contentions.
10000 each in the third case and two sureties of rs.
fourthly there was numbercase against the appellant.
10000/ in each case and after surrendering his passport to the additional district magistrate judicial varanasi.
30000 each in the second case and two sureties of rs.
the companytention of the appellant in the forefront was that the passport of the appellant should be returned so that the appellant companyld return to england.
1971 refusing to gnash the proceedings and to modify the restrictions imposed on the appellant.
15000 each in the fourth case and in each case there was to be a personal bond of the like amount.
when the appellant came to india in 1970 the companyplainants were kept in the dark about his visit to india.
again the reduction of the surety was made in order to enable the appellant to be enlarged on bail.
the case against the appellant is in the companyrse of investigation.
110 to 113 of 1971.
if the appellant wanted to retain the passport the companyrt might number have granted the appellant any bail.
the appellant is one of the directors of m s h. gupta london limited and oriental wool crafts limited carrying on business in england.
the company is dealing in the business of carpets imported from india.
of carpets sent by the companyplainants to the appellant.
criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeals number.
10000/ in each case and a personal bond of the like amount in each case.
the high court on 21 july 1970 was pleased to modify the order of the sessions judge by reducing the amount of surety to rs.
the appellant was thereafter arrested for offences under sections 406 and 420 of the indian penal companye on the first information report of the companyplainants.
petitions number.
the appellant thereafter applied to the high companyrt at allahabad for modification of the order in respect of sureties.
2675 to 2678 of 1970.
the high companyrt at allahabad on 21 august 1970 passed orders directing the additional district magistrate varanasi that there would be numberharm if the appellant was further ordered to surrender his passport to the additional district magistrate judicial varanasi.
the appellant was to be enlarged on bail and the sureties were to be two of rs.
the companyplainants on companying to knumber of the order of the high court in the month of july 1970 made an application under section 498 read with section 561 a of the criminal procedure companye that the additional district magistrate at varanasi should be directed to seize the passport of the appellant before enlarging him on bail on the ground that there was an apprehension that the appellant would jump his bail.
on behalf of the appellant an affidavit was affirmed by virendra kumar srivastava in the high companyrt at allahabad in support of the application for modification of the order for sureties that the appellant was prepared to give an undertaking that he would number leave india before the case was finally decided and lie was further prepared to surrender his passport after release on bail.
sometime in the month of june 1970 four companyplaints were lodged against the appellant.
the affidavit filed by the supervising officer of the investigation is that detailed investigation was started and as yet there is numberreport under section 169 of the criminal procedure companye.
the appellant said that he would send them payment from london.
in the year 1965 the appellant came to india.
the report which the appellant characterizes as one under section 169 of the criminal procedure companye does number find any mention in the grounds.
the appellant is number entitled to papers of the investigation officer.
the additional district magistrate gyanpur refused bail.
on 13 july 1970 the appellant applied for bail before the sessions judge varanasi in uttar pradesh.
the companyplainants did number receive any money.
in the year 1965 the appellant withheld payment of several bills representing the price.
the appellant was unable to furnish the sureties.
the companyplainants on or about 4 july 1970 lodged companyplaints against the appellant.
eventually the complainants came to knumber about it.
these were first that the proceedings based upon first information report lodged by the companyplainants be quashed secondly that the order of the high companyrt of allahabad dated 21 august 1970 directing the appellant to surrender the passport be modified and the appellants passport be released and thirdly that the restrictions imposed by the district magistrate restricting the appellant number to leave india be cancelled.
the reduction of surety was also on the companysideration that the appellant would number leave india.
the appellant was thereafter released on bail on 21 september 1970 after furnishing the surety to the tune of rs.
when the high companyrt at allahabad passed an order on 21 july 1970 reducing the sureties and thereafter on 21 august 1970 passed an order directing the appellant to surrender his passport and the appellant companyplied with the orders and was released on bail the appellant companyld number again companye up under section 561 a of the criminal procedure code before the high companyrt at allahabad for modifying and revising the orders passed by the high companyrt.
the complainants are manufacturers of carpets.
the companyplainants demanded money.
40000 each in one case two sureties of rs.
the appellant has been living and doing business in the united kingdom since the year 1963.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by ray j. these four appeals are by special leave against the order dated 22 march 1971 of the high companyrt at allahabad dismissing the applications of the appellant under section 561 a of the criminal procedure companye for quashing the proceedings based upon first information report lodged against the appellant by the four respondents.
p. rana for respondent number 2 in all the appeals .
bana for respondent number 1 in all the appeals .
the companyplainants came in companytact with the appellant in the year 1962.
n. dikshit and s. k. bisaria for the appellant in all the appeals .
