Return Ramani her freedom: HC to cops

Justice V K Shali observed: “It is very strange that despite three-and-a-half years,the investigating agency is still not able to file a final report before the competent court. If on account of agency’s inept attitude or handling the final report is not filed within a reasonable time,it does not mean the accused,who has been enlarged (freed) on bail with the condition of surrendering his (or her) passport or seeking permission from the court to travel abroad,can be made to suffer.”

Referring to various Supreme Court rulings,Justice Shali held that continuing the restrictions on Ramani would be equivalent to taking away her right to go abroad,which is part of personal liberty.

Following the HC order,Ramani is not required any more to apply to a court for her passport and permission to go abroad. Instead,she can only inform the Registrar General of High Court of her itinerary and make herself available before investigators whenever required.

According to Ramani’s petition,she had been abiding with the conditions of her 2006 bail order but failure of the police to file the chargesheet should not curb her fundamental right to travel abroad.

Ramani’s petition also claimed she had “testified as a witness in Jessica Lall murder case and but for her testimony it would not have resulted in conviction of the accused”.

The police theory is Ramani made use of forged documents to claim she owned ‘Once Upon A Time’,a restaurant-bar also known as ‘Tamarind Court’,and that she had a licence to serve liquor there.