- (1.) Hearing was conducted through video conferencing and the learned counsel agreed that the audio and visual quality was proper.
(2.) By this Revision Application, the applicant has challenged order dated 03/09/2020, passed by the Court of District Judge-7, Nagpur in Sessions Trial No. 5/2019, whereby an application filed on behalf of the applicant seeking permission to travel abroad was rejected.
(3.) The learned counsel for the applicant points out that similar applications were made in 22 other cases pending against the applicant and that the Competent Courts had granted permissions in all the 22 cases subject to certain conditions. It was submitted that the aforesaid Court rejected the application in only this singular case by making the following observations : "In this matter, already evidence of two witnesses has been recorded before lockdown but due to COVID-19 situation matter could not be completed. Now looking to the unlock situation, matter will be proceeded soon. The matter is old one and committed to the Sessions Court vide order dated 03-12-2018. Though the Ld. Counsel relied on Government Notification and citation but he has not filed its copies on record. Hence, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the matter being part heard, the appearance of the accused is necessary for his identification. Hence, in my opinion, applicant/accused is not entitled for the relief, as prayed. Hence, the order. The application (Exh.20) stands rejected.";