Right To Travel Abroad Can't Be Curtailed Solely On Grounds Of Pending Tax Prosecution: Bombay High Court

Justice S.M. Modak stated that, "It is true right to travel abroad is recognized as a fundamental right. Merely because a person is facing with prosecution, it does not mean that he cannot travel abroad till the time the investigation is under progress or criminal case is pending."

The respondent is an accused in connection with a File registered with the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence ('DRI'), Mumbai, for an offence punishable under Section 135(1)(a) and 135(1)(b) of the Customs Act.

He was granted bail by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate. The condition mentions about surrendering the passport for the period of six months from the date of arrest. He has surrendered the passport.

After this order, respondent applied for returning the passport and sought permission to travel abroad for a furniture fair at Paris. The Trial Court has granted permission in spite of the objection on behalf of DRI.

The counsel for the respondent submitted that permission is granted only for a short period, and he justified the right of his client to travel abroad being a fundamental right and to attend the international furniture fair organised at Paris.

The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Respondent will tamper with the evidence when he travels to Paris and France.

The bench stated that, admittedly, the case is under investigation that is to say the DRI is in the process of collecting materials. When such a request is made on the say of the investigator, the Court has to consider whether there is a possibility of tampering with the evidence if the permission to travel abroad is granted.

There is one more factor which deals with the availability of the accused person during the investigation. Ultimately, Court has to balance the right of the investigating agency, on one hand and the right of the person facing prosecution to travel in India and abroad, on the other hand, added the bench.

The bench opined that merely because an investigation is going on, the Respondent cannot be restrained from attending the international furniture fair.

The bench directed the respondent not to establish contact with the Exporters who are related to this case.

In view of the above, the bench dismissed the petition.

Case Title: Sruti Vijaykumar v. Falgun Yogendra Shroff and anr.

Case Number: Criminal Writ Petition No.4670 of 2025

Counsel for Petitioner/Assessee: Shyamrishi R. Pathak, Sr. standing Counsel i/b. Ganesh Singh, Jyoti Borai

Counsel for Respondent/Department: Dr. Sujay Kantawala, Bhushan Shah, Akash Jain, Aishwarya Kantawala, Mohd. Lokandwala, Jeffry Caleb, Ayushi Jha, Gaurav Ekekar i/b, Mansukhlal Hiralal & Co. for respondent no.1 and Mr. A.S. Gawai, APP for State

Click Here To Read/Download The Order