Matrimonial Dispute: Andhra Pradesh HC Permits Elderly Couple To Travel To US, Says Pending Criminal Case Can’t Come In Way Of Passport Renewal
Observing that pendency of the criminal proceedings against them shall not come in the way of renewal of their passports, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has permitted an elderly couple to travel to the US. The couple are accused in a case, related to matrimonial dispute of their son, under Sections 498-A and 417 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), as well as Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry...
Observing that pendency of the criminal proceedings against them shall not come in the way of renewal of their passports, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has permitted an elderly couple to travel to the US.
The couple are accused in a case, related to matrimonial dispute of their son, under Sections 498-A and 417 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), as well as Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Justice Ninala Jayasurya in the ruling said that the contention of the respondent-wife that the couple is intending to travel abroad to perform second marriage of their son, who is her husband, and therefore the plea to travel may be rejected, “cannot be appreciated”.
“If the petitioner No.1 contracts second marriage during the subsistence of the earlier marriage, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant is entitled to avail the relevant statutory remedies...,” said the court.
The court also rejected the contention of counsel that the travel was being planned to avoid the legal proceedings pending against them.
“There are ways and means to secure the presence of the petitioners, if they are avoiding the legal proceedings initiated against them,” the court observed.
Justice Jayasurya noted that Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court in Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India and Another has categorically held that, “no person can be deprived of his right to go to abroad, unless there is a Law made by the State, prescribing the procedure for so depriving him and the depravation is effected strictly in accordance with such procedure.”
"In view of the settled legal position, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioners cannot be deprived of their Right to Travel on the premise that the Criminal proceedings are pending against them," said the court.
Allowing the application, the court said that, “However, they shall file Affidavit of undertaking that as and when required by this Court or any other Court in connection with the Criminal proceedings initiated against them pursuant to the complaint lodged by the 2nd respondent dated 19.11.2020 and the consequential proceedings, the petitioners will appear without fail.”
Case Title: RK & others. v. State of A.P & ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AP) 26
Counsel for the Petitioners:K.Kiran Kumar
Counsel for the 2nd Respondent:K.V.S.S.Prabhakar Rao