Delhi High Court Upholds Right To Travel Abroad, Permits Duo Allegedly Involved In ₹1626.74 Crore Bank Fraud To Visit Children In USA

In doing so, Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar not only cited the fundamental right to travel under Article 21 of the Constitution but also noted that the LOC against them stood suspended.

Moreover, though the Supreme Court had directed the Punjab & Haryana High Court to reconsider its order setting aside the declaration of Fraud, the HC order was not stayed and as such, the declaration of fraud remains set aside.

The bench observed,

“The reasons for travel, as stated by Petitioner No.1, is to spend time with his child and also to attend his graduation. Undoubtedly, the graduation of a child from Yale University is a matter of great pride and this Court does not find it inappropriate to permit Petitioner No. 1 to travel for the said purpose.
The reasons for travel, as stated by Petitioner No. 2, is to spend time with his two children who are presently working and residing in the United States of America and are unable to visit India due to their work schedules. Undoubtedly, this Court does not find it inappropriate to permit Petitioner No. 2 to travel for the purpose of meeting his children.”

As per the Union, a large-scale fraud has been committed by the Petitioners against the Central Bank of India and other consortium banks, amounting to Rs.1626.74 crores. It was contended that there is a grave risk in allowing them to travel and their departure out of India would be detrimental to the economic interest of the country.

The High Court noted that the LOC issued against the Petitioners at the behest of the CBI had been closed back in August 2024 and LOC at the behest of the ED was suspended in April this year.

Moreover, the only reason given by the Bank for the purpose of supporting the LOC was that role of Petitioners is under grave suspicion being the master-mind of the offence.

“This reply, to say the least, is highly generic and vague without giving particulars in any manner, as to the assumptions set out therein,” the Court observed.

It added, “Right to travel has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as an integral part of the fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and any restriction of the same without sufficient cause, would amount to a violation of his fundamental rights,” and allowed the petition with conditions.

Appearance: Mr. Arshdeep Singh Khurana, Ms. Neena Nagpal, Mr. Malak M Bhatt, Mr. Vishvendra Tomar, Mr. Ajatshatru Singh Rawat & Ms. Tannavi Sharma, Advs for Petitioner; Mr. Santosh Kumar Rout, Standing Counsel with Ms. Dharna Veragi & Ms. Shruti Tripathi & Ms. Shakshi Raj, Advs. for R-2.

Case title: Vineet Gupta v. Union of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 690

Case no.: W.P.(C) 7850/2025

Click here to read order