Allahabad High Court
Dr. Mohd. Abdul Aleem Khan vs State Of U.P. Thru. The Superintendent ... on 21 December, 2023
Author: Saurabh Lavania
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:84900
Court No. - 11
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12654 of 2023
Applicant :- Dr. Mohd. Abdul Aleem Khan
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Superintendent Of Police U.P. Vigilance Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pranjal Krishna
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
Heard Sri Nandit Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Tanmay Krishna Srivastava and Sri J.P. Awasthi, learned counsel appearing for the applicant, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and perused the record.
By means of the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant/Dr. Mohd. Abdul Aleem Khan and about 74 years has assailed the order dated 19.12.2023 passed by Special Judge, Prevention of Corruption Act/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 6, Lucknow in Sessions Trial No. 590 of 2023 (State vs. Dr. Mohd. Abdul Aleem Khan).
By the order dated 19.12.2023, the court concerned has rejected the application of the applicant, whereby, he sought permission to visit Saudi Arabia for 'Umrah'.
Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the applicant submitted that the manner in which the trial court has rejected the application of the applicant seeking permission to visit Saudi Arabia for 'Umrah' is unsustainable in the eye of law, as it is against the settled preposition of law including the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in this regard whereby the Hon'ble Apex Court observed that right to travel abroad is covered under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Reference can be made to the judgment passed in the case of Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597 and Parvez Noordin Lokhandwalla vs. State of Maharashtra and another, (2020) 10 SCC 77.
He further submitted that the reasoning given by ADGC (Criminal) in the order impugned dated 19.12.2023 to the effect that according to religious belief, it is necessary to any person to perform only 'Hajj' and going on 'Umrah' is not such an essential act even from the religious point of view, is completely misconceived. However, the same was taken note of while passing the order impugned dated 19.12.2023.
He further submitted that the applicant is ready to furnish heavy surety including the surety to the tune of Rs. 5 lakh each.
Considered the aforesaid.
'Umrah' is a journey to Muslim's most sacred place. 'Umrah' is known as minor pilgrimage while 'Hajj' is the main pilgrimage. 'Umrah' is considered as a journey to holiest place of Muslim's and a journey of devotion to Allah.
Taking note of aforesaid including the age of the applicant, this Court is of the view that the applicant be permitted to visit Saudi Arabia for 'Umrah'.
Accordingly, the order dated 19.12.2023 is hereby set-aside. The applicant is permitted to visitSaudi Arabia for 'Umrah' subject to furnishing his personal bond and two sureties of Rs. 5 lakh each of family member to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned.
The applicant shall also file an affidavit of undertaking indicating therein the reasonable period for visiting Saudi Arabia for 'Umrah' and also that he will not raise any objection during or after trial if any evidence is adduced by the prosecution in his absence during the said period.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed in above terms.
Order Date :- 21.12.2023
Arun/-
