2021 (6) TMI 437 - HC - Customs

Seeking permission to travel abroad - seeking release of passport - smuggling - Foreign Currency - right to travel - Fundamental Rights - offence punishable under Section 135 of the Customs Act 1962 - HELD THAT - There is no serious challenge to the medical grounds made by the petitioner in the application which was filed before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, on the basis of which petitioner was allowed to travel abroad. In the reply filed by the respondent, it appears that respondent is not averse to the foreign travel of the petitioner if the petitioner is directed to deposit 50% of the amount recovered from her in the form of Indian currency. In the instant case, according to the respondent, amount of USD 90000 was recovered from the petitioner which was around ₹ 65,00,000/- in Indian currency. The petitioner in the instant case is a lady, aged about 54 years, and there is nothing on record to show that she has previously involved in these types of activities. The condition to deposit 50% of the recovered amount to my opinion would be quite onerous. The petitioner is allowed to travel abroad to her country, i.e. Taiwan, for a period of six months i.e. from 12.06.2021 to 11.12.2021 on deposit of amount of ₹ 15,00,000/- lakhs in the form of an FDR in the name of Registrar General of this Court, and subjects imposed.

Summary

Issues:
Setting aside of the order dated 10.2.2021 in Criminal Revision Petition 09/2021.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought to set aside an order passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, New Delhi, related to the interception of five passengers at the IGI Airport suspected of smuggling foreign currency.
2. The petitioner was found in possession of a significant amount of foreign currency and had faced legal proceedings regarding the release of her passport and permission to travel abroad.
3. The Sessions Court set aside the order granting permission to the petitioner to travel abroad for six months, citing concerns about her return to face trial and involvement in a customs offense.
4. The Department argued that allowing the petitioner to travel abroad might lead to her not returning to face trial and proposed the deposit of a significant amount of recovered foreign currency as a condition for travel.
5. The petitioner's counsel argued that she was a mere carrier, facing hardship in India, and needed to visit her native country due to family and medical reasons.
6. The Court considered the medical grounds presented by the petitioner, her age, lack of prior criminal involvement, and the onerous nature of the proposed deposit condition.
7. Ultimately, the Court allowed the petitioner to travel abroad to Taiwan for six months on the condition of depositing a specified amount in the form of an FDR and subject to various conditions to ensure her return and compliance with legal proceedings.
8. The Court emphasized the petitioner's obligation to report back, surrender her passport upon return, and not engage in similar offenses or interfere with the legal process.

This detailed analysis covers the issues involved in the judgment, the arguments presented by both parties, and the Court's reasoning leading to the final decision allowing the petitioner to travel abroad under specified conditions.