The Rajasthan High Court recently allowed a man accused in a Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) case to travel abroad for business meetings, emphasizing that the right to travel is a fundamental aspect of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. The court imposed strict conditions, including a ₹25 lakh bank guarantee, to ensure his return.
Background of the Case
The petitioner, Ashutosh Bajoria, was accused under Sections 3 and 4 of the PMLA. The Special Court in Jaipur issued arrest warrants after taking cognizance of the case in July 2021. However, the warrants were returned unserved, with a report stating Bajoria had absconded. Standing arrest warrants and proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 of the CrPC were subsequently initiated.
Bajoria later applied to convert the non-bailable warrants into bailable ones, but the trial court rejected his plea. He then approached the High Court, which granted him interim relief, allowing him to furnish bail bonds. He was released on bail with the condition that he would not leave India without court permission.
Read Also:- J&K High Court: Section 106 of Evidence Act Cannot Fill Gaps Without Foundational Facts in Murder Case
Bajoria sought permission to travel to Singapore and Dubai for business meetings, submitting letters from companies inviting him. The trial court denied his request, citing insufficient documentation. Challenging this order, he approached the High Court.
Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand referred to the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), which held that the right to travel abroad is part of personal liberty under Article 21. The court stated:
"The expression 'personal liberty' under Article 21 of the Constitution of India has a wider amplitude, which includes the right to go abroad. A person cannot be deprived of this right except in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law."
Read also:- Kerala High Court Upholds Humanity: Grants Escort Parole to Death Row Convict to Visit Dying Mother
The High Court balanced this right with the prosecution’s concerns, noting that appropriate conditions could ensure the accused’s presence for trial. It dismissed the Enforcement Directorate’s objections, highlighting that Bajoria had provided sufficient proof of his business engagements.
The court allowed Bajoria’s travel but imposed strict conditions:
- He must return to India by January 20, 2023, and furnish a ₹25 lakh bank guarantee.
- He must appear before the trial court upon return.
- He cannot visit any country other than Singapore and Dubai.
- He must keep his mobile active and share his contact details with the court.
Failure to comply would result in forfeiture of the bank guarantee and legal action.
Case Title: Ashutosh Bajoria v Rajesh Kumar Sharma (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 12/2023)
