Toolkit Case: Delhi High Court Dismisses Disha Ravi’s Plea To Modify Bail Condition Restricting Foreign Travel Without Prior Permission
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed the plea moved by climate activist Disha Ravi, accused in the 2021 “toolkit case”, seeking modification of a bail condition requiring her to obtain prior permission from court each time before travelling abroad.Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma rejected the petition moved by Ravi seeking modification of the bail condition which read as “She shall...
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed the plea moved by climate activist Disha Ravi, accused in the 2021 “toolkit case”, seeking modification of a bail condition requiring her to obtain prior permission from court each time before travelling abroad.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma rejected the petition moved by Ravi seeking modification of the bail condition which read as “She shall not leave the country without the permission of the court.”
The plea challenged the trial court order passed on August 09 rejecting her application to modify the bail condition. Ravi was arrested by Delhi Police from her Bengaluru residence on February 13, 2021. She was later granted bail by trial court on February 23, 2021.
While dismissing the plea, the court said that it does not undermine Ravi’s fundamental right to have freedom to travel abroad as per Article 21 of Indian Constitution, but at the same time, it also cannot undermine the right of the prosecuting agency to ensure that the investigation is carried out and completed without any hindrance.
“The investigating agency has still not filed chargesheet and may also require the presence or information from the accused/petitioner and therefore, merely intimating and going abroad to any country without permission, without submitting the itinerary and the duration or purpose of such visit will have adverse impact on the investigation and trial of the case as in that case, the Court concerned will have no check as to for how long and for what purpose the petitioner will be leaving the country and her whereabouts and itinerary will not be verified by the State before she leaves abroad which cannot be permitted at this stage when the chargesheet is yet to be filed,” the court said.
Furthermore, Justice Sharma noted that there is no “infringement of mobility rights” or any geographical boundaries restriction placed on Ravi but a reasonable condition of seeking permission of court before travelling abroad, which has not been denied to her in the past.
The court said that the trial court order portrayed the “fine balancing” between the restriction on the right of an accused under Article 21 by imposing this restriction and balancing it by permitting Ravi to go abroad after seeking permission of the Court.
“It portrays that it is not a blanket ban or infringement of her fundamental right to travel abroad but a reasonable restriction by the Court meant to enforce through the legal system and order that neither the investigation nor the trial is affected by the absence or non-availability of the accused, while causing and interfering in most minimal manner with the convenience and fundamental right of the petitioner,” the court said.
During the hearing, the counsel appearing for Ravi submitted that the condition of permission be converted to that of “intimation”. It was contended that Ravi, who has to go abroad frequently, is required to seek permission from the trial court each time before her travel.
It was also stated that Ravi has travelled abroad frequently in the past two and half years and that she has never violated any bail condition as imposed by the trial court.
On the other hand, the Delhi Police had opposed her plea on the ground that merely because a bail condition is found to be inconvenient cannot be a ground to modify the same. The court was also told that the reason for delay of investigation in the matter has already been explained by the prosecution before the trial court.
The Delhi Police had justified before the trial court the ground for its failure to conclude investigation stating that the proceedings with regards to the offence of sedition had been stayed by the Supreme Court of India and that the prosecution, after obtaining opinion from Solicitor General of India, has “restarted the investigation” with regard to remaining offences.
The trial court was also told that the offences being investigated involve suspected persons who are based in several foreign countries and that the investigating agency is in the process of collecting important evidence from relevant agencies and intermediaries.
Ravi was granted bail by the trial court observing the "scanty and sketchy evidence" against her.
It was the Delhi Police’s case that various “toolkit documents” were circulated on social media during the 2021 farmers’ protest, allegedly created by an organisation called "Poetic Justice Foundation" and that the aim of the creators were to promote disaffection against India.
As per the prosecution, the violence during the protests was attributed as being caused by way of the “incitement to violence contained in the document” which was allegedly created by Ravi.
It was also alleged that she was part of a WhatsApp group which included persons who allegedly edited the toolkit and also communicated the same with others including environmental activist Greta Thunberg.
Advocate Abhinav Sekhri appeared for the petitioner.
ASC (Crl.) Amol Sinha with Advocates Kshitiz Garg, Ashvini Kumar and Chavi Lazarus appeared for the State.
Case Title: Disha A Ravi v. State
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 894