High Court Allows Accused Student to Go Abroad for Higher Education Despite Pending Criminal Trial
In a significant judgment dated 09 September 2025, the Punjab & Haryana High Court reaffirmed that the right to travel abroad and pursue education forms part of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court allowed a young accused facing criminal trial to travel abroad for higher studies after setting aside the trial court’s order refusing permission.
To study abroad with pending legal cases in India, you must formally petition the court for permission. Because the right to travel is a facet of personal liberty under Article 21, courts generally permit this, provided you guarantee you will not evade trial and commit to a specific timeframe. [1, 2, 3]
Key Requirements & Process
- Purpose & Duration: Proof of your course, university acceptance, and duration of the program. [1, 2]
- Travel Bond: You may be required to provide a reliable surety or financial bond to ensure your return. [1]
- Continuous Representation: Your advocate must continually file exemption applications (under Section 317 of the BNSS) so your trial can proceed while you are away. [1, 2]
- In-Person Attendance: You must commit to appearing physically in India whenever the court mandates it for crucial proceedings (e.g., cross-examinations, witness testimonies)
📌 Background of the Case
The petitioner was facing prosecution under various provisions of:
- Indian Penal Code (IPC)
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
Despite the pending criminal case:
- The petitioner was already on bail
- He had cleared the IELTS examination
- He received admission offer from a university in Germany for:
🎓 B.Sc. Computer Science course - Duration of course:
📅 36 months
The trial court, however, declined permission to travel abroad on the apprehension that the accused may not return to face trial.
Also Read-Travel Abroad Permission HighCourt Chandigarh Case
⚖️ Key Issue Before the High Court
Whether an accused person facing criminal trial can be denied permission to go abroad solely on the basis of apprehension that he may evade proceedings?
🏛 High Court’s Key Findings
🔹 Right to Travel Abroad Is Part of Article 21
The High Court relied upon landmark Supreme Court judgments including:
- Satwant Singh Sawhney vs Assistant Passport Officer
- Maneka Gandhi vs Union of India
and reiterated that:
Personal liberty under Article 21 includes the right to travel abroad.
The Court emphasized that such right can be restricted only:
- Through fair and lawful procedure.
🔹 Education & Career Cannot Be Sacrificed on Mere Apprehension
The Court observed:
- The petitioner was only 21 years old
- He had a bright academic future
- Denial of permission could seriously damage:
- Career prospects
- Educational opportunities
The Court remarked:
Mere apprehension of absconding cannot become a ground to destroy a young person’s future.
🔹 Courts Can Impose Safeguards Instead of Blanket Refusal
The High Court clarified that:
Instead of outright rejection, courts may impose:
✔ Heavy surety bonds
✔ Undertakings for appearance
✔ Conditions ensuring participation in trial
✔ Permission for recording evidence in absence of accused
The Court referred to earlier precedents where accused persons were permitted to travel abroad subject to stringent safeguards.
❌ Trial Court Order Set Aside
The High Court held that:
- The trial court failed to apply sound legal principles
- The refusal order was based merely on speculative apprehension
Accordingly:
✔ The impugned order was quashed
✔ Trial court directed to permit foreign travel
✔ Liberty granted to impose strict conditions for ensuring trial participation.
📌 Key Legal Takeaways
✔ Right to travel abroad is protected under Article 21
✔ Accused persons cannot be denied education opportunities mechanically
✔ Mere apprehension of absconding is insufficient
✔ Courts should balance liberty with safeguards
✔ Conditions like surety and undertakings can protect trial proceedings
🧑⚖️ Why This Judgment Matters
This ruling is important for:
- Students facing criminal cases
- Passport/travel permission disputes
- Bail-related foreign travel applications
It reinforces the principle that:
“Criminal proceedings should not unnecessarily destroy educational and career opportunities.”
🔍 Read More on Below Keywords:
Permission to go abroad criminal case
Article 21 right to travel abroad
High Court study abroad permission
Accused allowed foreign education
Travel abroad during criminal trial
Punjab Haryana High Court Article 21 case
More on 99888-17966
