9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The judgment deals with the issue of whether the petitioner, who is facing criminal charges, should be permitted to travel abroad for business purposes. Details of the judgment: 1. The petitioner, a businessman facing criminal charges, sought permission to travel abroad for business reasons. The Trial Court initially rejected the request due to the petitioner's past absconding. The petitioner argued that he had been regularly attending trial proceedings since his release on bail and should be allowed to travel. The petitioner's right to travel abroad for livelihood was emphasized. 2. The C.B.I. opposed the petitioner's request, citing the seriousness of the offence and the petitioner's past conduct. The Court noted the lengthy trial process ahead, with numerous witnesses and documents involved. 3. The Court acknowledged the petitioner's fundamental right to travel abroad as part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It emphasized the need for restrictions on this right to be reasonable and proportionate to the case's circumstances. 4. Considering the facts of the case and the ongoing trial, the Court decided to allow the petitioner to travel abroad to Thailand and the United Kingdom for business purposes. Specific conditions were imposed, including providing a bond, daily reporting to the C.B.I., and returning to India by a specified date. 5. The Court directed the C.B.I. to ensure compliance with the imposed conditions and to assist the petitioner in availing the travel permission. The revisional application was allowed, permitting the petitioner to travel abroad within the specified itinerary. 6. The judgment balanced the petitioner's right to travel for business with the need to ensure his presence for trial, highlighting the importance of upholding fundamental rights while considering the administration of criminal justice.
|
