Courts Have To Be Circumspect While Allowing Foreign Travel During Pendency Of Criminal Case: Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court last week observed that Courts have to be 'even more circumspect' while granting permission to a person to travel abroad during the pendency of a criminal case against him/her.

The Bench of Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul, however, did underscore that the right of a person to travel admittedly cannot be curtailed.

"However, if the person is seeking to travel that too outside India, during the pendency of a criminal case against him, the Court shall have to be even more circumspect while granting any such permission," the Court further added.

Essentially, the Court was dealing with the plea of one Daljit Singh Pandher, who challenged the trial court's order dismissing his application seeking permission to go to Canada for one year due to the pendency of a criminal case against him under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC.

Significantly, his counsel argued that his client's fundamental right to travel abroad cannot be curtailed merely because of the pendency of a criminal case against him. It was also submitted that he has not only been unable to join his job in Canada but also has been unable to meet his family since December 2018

Court observations

At the outset, the court observed that even though the petitioner was seeking permission to go to Canada for joining back his work, however, he did not place on record any supporting document to show that he was actually employed in Canada.

The Court also found justification in the reasoning given by the trial court that his absence for one year would result in the delay of the trial since evidence had not yet commenced. 

Lastly, noting that the court has to be circumspect while allowing foreign travel during the pendency of the criminal case, the Court observed thus:

"Coming to the case in hand, it would be apposite to observe that since the petitioner is a Canadian citizen, his assertion that he should be permitted to travel abroad is devoid of any merit as India too is a foreign country for him and there could be a likelihood that in case the petitioner is permitted to travel to Canada he may abscond."

In the aforesaid circumstances, decline to invoke its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.PC, the Court dismissed the plea.

Case title - Daljit Singh Pandher v. State of Punjab & ors.

Click Here To Download Order 

Read Order