Shilpa Shetty, Raj Kundra withdraw plea to travel abroad amid LOC proceedings before Bombay High Court

Actor Shilpa Shetty and her businessman husband Raj Kundra have withdrawn their application before the Bombay High Court seeking permission to travel abroad, after her counsel informed the Court that she no longer intends to leave the country for now. [Raj Kundra v. Union of India]

A Bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad recorded the withdrawal and dismissed the plea as withdrawn, granting liberty to move a fresh application with complete particulars whenever she wishes to travel.

The Court directed that the main writ petition challenging the Look Out Circular (LOC) issued to Shetty and Kundra by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) in connection with a ₹60-crore cheating complaint filed by businessman Deepak Kothari be listed for hearing on November 17.

The LOC was issued after allegations that investor funds were misused under the guise of business operations. Earlier this year, the High Court had directed the couple to deposit ₹60 crore before any travel request could be considered and had rejected their plea to travel to Phuket.

In previous hearings, the Bench had also questioned the basis of Shetty’s proposed “business trip” to the United States, observing that no formal documentation or engagement letter had been produced. On an earlier date, the Bench had even remarked, “Why don’t you turn approver?” — hinting that cooperation with the investigation could be a viable course.

The Court today also recorded that the intervener may move a formal intervention application and that his replies may be taken on record.

During the hearing, counsel for the intervener raised a serious objection, alleging that Shetty’s additional affidavit dated October 14, setting out her proposed travel schedule, was not notarised in accordance with law. The counsel claimed that the notary whose seal appears on the document had denied having attested it and that the signature in the notary’s register was completely at variance.

Appearing for Shetty, Advocate Niranjan Mundargi told the Court that he had no instructions regarding the notarisation but confirmed that the applicant was not pressing her travel request.

“In view of the above, the interim application stands dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh one when the applicant intends to travel,” the Bench recorded.