Court must be circumspect before allowing accused to travel abroad while trial is pending: P&H High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently denied permission to an accused man seeking to travel abroad to Canada citing the pendency of the criminal trial. (Dalbir Singh Pandher v. State of Punjab and Others).Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul acknowledged that the right of a person to travel admittedly cannot be curtailed. However, when a criminal trial is pending against an accused, courts must be cautious before granting such a person permission to leave the country, the Judge opined.."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", stated the order. .The Court was hearing a petition filed by one, Daljit Singh Pandher. challenging a trial court order dismissing his application seeking permission to go to Canada for one year, while a criminal case against him was still pending. .In the criminal case at hand, Daljit stood booked under Section 498-A (cruelty to woman) and Section 406 (criminal breach of trust) of the Indian Penal Code 1860..Advocate SS Gill, appearing for Daljit, argued that the fundamental right to travel abroad of the petitioner cannot be curtailed merely because of the pendency of a criminal case against him. He added that due to the long pendency of the case, the Daljit had not be able to resume his work at Canada or meet his family. It was contended further that since every person is innocent until proven guilty, the Court should grant Dalji permission to move to Canada..The High Court noted that no supporting documents were submitted before the trial court to show that Daljit was actually employed in Canada. The High Court further agreed with the trial court's observation that his absence for one year could delay the trial..The fact that the petitioner was a Canadian citizen also prompted the Court to deny him permission to travel to Canada.."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", the Court said. .On these grounds, the petition was dismissed. .[Read Order].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.