Lucknow, May 04, 2025
The Allahabad High Court has ruled that bail does not confer an automatic right to travel abroad for personal events such as family weddings or leisure trips. The court clarified that permission for international travel during a pending trial may only be granted for compelling reasons, such as medical emergencies or essential official duties. The ruling came in response to a plea by Aditya Murti, a consultant at Shri Ram Murti Smarak Institute of Medical Sciences, Bareilly, who sought to travel to the United States and France for a family wedding and related event.
Justice Subhash Vidyarthi, presiding over the case, dismissed Murti’s petition, which challenged a Special CBI Court’s April 24 order denying his request to travel between May 3 and May 22. Murti, currently facing trial in a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) case, argued that prior permissions for non-essential international travel should serve as a precedent for his current application. He further emphasized his compliance with conditions during past trips and the limited duration of the proposed travel.
Rejecting these arguments, the court held that prior permissions do not create a vested right to travel abroad for non-essential purposes. “An accused person who has been enlarged on bail can be granted permission to travel abroad for some pressing necessity like medical treatment, attending essential official duties and the like. Attending a relative’s wedding or engaging in a pleasure trip does not amount to a pressing necessity,” Justice Vidyarthi observed.
The court noted that the trial, pending for over a decade, had reached the stage of defense evidence, and further delays could undermine the Supreme Court’s directive for its expeditious completion. “Merely because the trial court had earlier granted permission to the applicant to travel abroad for non-essential objects on numerous occasions, he does not get a right to travel abroad for non-essential objects this time,” the court added.
Upholding the Special CBI Court’s decision, the High Court emphasized that the liberty granted under bail is not absolute and must align with the interests of justice and the timely progression of the trial. The dismissal of Murti’s petition reinforces the judiciary’s stance on balancing individual freedoms with the demands of ongoing legal proceedings.
