Allahabad High Court
Smt. Poonam Jain vs State Of U.P. on 4 October, 2023
Bench: Gajendra Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?.
.
.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:190998
Court No. - 91
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 33779 of 2023
Applicant :- Smt. Poonam Jain
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ambreen Masroor,Sadrul Islam Jafri,Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J.
1. Heard Sri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.
2. The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the order dated 24.08.2023 passed by Civil Judge (Jr. Division) F.T.C. 1/Judicial Magistrate, Court No.32, Ghaziabad and kindly issue a direction to the Civil Judge (Jr. Division) F.T.C. 1/Judicial Magistrate, Court No.32, Ghaziabad to allow the application dated 14.07.2023 and release the passport of the applicant and allow her to travel to Canada for a period of two months starting from 15.10.2023 to 15.12.2023 for the purpose of attending the wedding of her daughter namely Madhvi Jain and for that purpose the Court may fix any condition or heavy surety and same will be complied with by the applicant relating to Criminal Case No.25020 of 2020, arising out of Case Crime No.55 of 2020, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506, 120-B IPC, Police Station Kavi Nagar, District Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Jr. Division) F.T.C. 1/Judicial Magistrate, Court No.32, Ghaziabad.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the charge sheet has been submitted by the I.O. against the applicant and co-accused before the court below and thereafter applicant was summoned under the aforesaid offences. Looking to the apprehension of her (applicant) arrest, applicant had filed anticipatory bail before the Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad, which was dismissed by the court below without applying judicial mind against which, the applicant had also approached this Court by means of anticipatory bail and this Court was granted anticipatory bail to the applicant with the condition that "applicant shall surrender her passport, if any, to the concerned trial court forthwith. Her passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial court". Further submission is that as applicant has to attend the wedding ceremony of her daughter in Canada on 27.11.2023, for which she had filed an application for the release of her passport, but the same was rejected by the court below vide order dated 24.08.2023 in a very arbitrary and cursory manner, which is liable to be set-aside and the prayer is made to release the passport of the applicant and allowed her to travel to Canada for the period of two months starting from 15.10.2023 to 15.12.2023 for the purpose of attending the wedding of her daughter namely Madhvi Jain and for that purpose the Court may fix any condition or heavy surety and same will be complied with by the applicant.
4. On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the prayer but could not dispute the aforesaid facts that the right to travel abroad is a fundamental right.
5. Having heard the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perusal of records, it appears that the applicant is on anticipatory bail, in which a condition has been imposed to the effect that "applicant shall surrender her passport, if any, to the concerned trial court forthwith. Her passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial court" and the applicant moved an application for the release of the passport to attend the marriage of her daughter, which was rejected by the trial court vide order dated 24.08.2023. In this case involved right to life and personal liberty, which is enshrined in the article 21 of Constitution of India and court has no power to bound anybody to live his/her life freely unless he/she is a history sheeter or involved in committing the heinous or serious crimes.
6. In the case of Satwant Singh Sawhney Vs. D. Ramaratham and others, AIR 1967 SC 1836 held that:- an Indian Passport is factually an necessary condition for travel abroad and without it no person residing in India can travel outside India. The Court highlights the Article 14, 19 & 21 of the Constitution of India, which clearly talks about the right to travel abroad is a fundamental right and absence of law regulating such right, refusal of passport or withdrawal or one given violate the Article 21 & 14, Expression "personal liberty" in Article 21 includes right to travel abroad.
7. In the case of Satish Chandra Verma Vs. Union of India and others, Civil Appeal SC 3802 of 2019 held that:- The right to travel abroad is an important basic human right for it nourishes independent and self-determining creative character of the individual, not only by extending his freedoms of action, but also by extending the scope of his experience. The right also extends to private life; marriage, family and friendship are humanities which can be rarely affected through refusal of freedom to go abroad and clearly show that this freedom is a genuine human right. (See: Mrs. Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India and another (1978) 1 SCC 248). In the said judgment, there is a reference to the words of Justice Douglas in Kent v. Dulles 357 US 116 which are as follows:-
"Freedom to go abroad has much social value and represents the basic human right of great significance." In the instant case, the appellant who is a member of the All India Services has paid leave to his credit and has applied to go to U.S.A. and France to visit members of his family who are residing there. On an earlier occasion this Court permitted him to travel to U.S.A. in the year 2017 and he promptly came back."
8. In the light of above discussed judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court clearly reveals that right to travel is a valuable fundamental right and it can be curtailed only under exceptional circumstances.
9. There is no exceptional circumstances in this case warranting the curtailment of the valuable fundamental right of the applicant. Resultantly, the impugned order dated 24.08.2023 is hereby set aside and the applicant is permitted to take back her passport from the court concerned with the condition that she will surrender the same on or before 15.12.2023.
10. The court concerned is directed to release the passport for the period of two months starting from 15.10.2023 to 15.12.2023 subject to one personal bond and two heavy sureties and undertaking.
11. Accordingly, the present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed off.
Order Date :- 4.10.2023
Sanjeet
