RIGHT TO TRAVEL Exercise caution while grounding accused, HC tells courts
RIGHT TO TRAVEL
Exercise caution while grounding accused, HC tells courts
http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=Q0FQLzIwMTIvMTIvMTgjQXIwMDcwMA%3D%3D
might this judgment can be used in u r case
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/170923836/
Publication: The Times Of India Delhi; Date: Dec 18, 2012; Section: Times City; Page: 7
RIGHT TO TRAVEL
Exercise caution while grounding accused, HC tells courts
Abhinav Garg TNN
New Delhi:The right to travel can’t be curtailed as a matter of routine, the Delhi high court has cautioned, asking courts in the capital to be much more selective in grounding an accused.
“Undoubtedly, the accused’s right to travel can be curtailed by a reasonable, transparent and fair procedure, but in the opinion of this court such restriction should be rarely imposed by the trial court while granting bail and that too for cogent reasons,” Justice Manmohan observed on Monday.
HC was hearing a plea of a woman barred from leaving Delhi by a sessions court as she has been charged with dowry harassment by her sister-in-law.
The trial court had, while granting anticipatory bail confiscated her passport and said that every time she needs to step outside the city, she will
have to seek permission from the court.
Justice Manmohan took note of the fact that “condition of obtaining prior permission before leaving Delhi is a cumbersome one as the permission takes time and causes hardship…it certainly restricts the accused’s fundamental right to travel” and quashed the lower court’s condition.
In her plea, the woman had informed HC that she is employed with a firm that is part of the World Bank group. She had also stated that due to exigency of work she has to periodically travel out of station and even abroad.
Citing communication to this effect from the firm’s South Asia head, the woman submitted she has to frequently travel to Nepal for a period of six months but the condition imposed by the lower court makes it extremely hard for her to travel for employment.
HC empathized with the plight of the woman agreeing that if the sessions court condition is not waived off, she could lose her job. “In the opinion of this court, the petitioner who has no criminal antecedents and good academic qualifications is unlikely to abscond,” HC reasoned, brushing aside objections by the complainant in the case and allowing her plea.