Last Updated on October 30, 2025 by Satish Mishra
Post covers Travel Abroad Permission HighCourt Chandigarh Case wherein you will mention the specific reason for going so along with dates of travel. After duly considering the request as permissible under Law, then only HighCourt Chandigarh Grants permission to the parties.
Various High Courts across the country has declared the Right to Travel as integral part to Article 21 of Constitution wherein the vague apprehensions cannot override personal liberty.
Court has further held- “Any restriction of the right to travel without sufficient cause would amount to a violation of his fundamental rights.” You can read this entire story here.
Is a petitioner Flight Risk? Will the restraint on liberty justified?
Flight risk in bail refers to the likelihood that an accused person will flee the jurisdiction to evade the legal process. Courts consider factors like strong community ties, stable employment, and assets to assess flight risk, as the presence of these elements can indicate a lower risk. Conversely, a high flight risk can lead to denial of bail or stricter conditions.
How flight risk is determined
- Community and family ties: Having strong connections to a community and a family can make a person less likely to flee.
- Employment and assets: A permanent job and ownership of assets are often seen as factors that tie an individual to the community, reducing flight risk.
- Ability to pay bail: The amount of bail itself can be seen as an indicator. Someone with the means to forfeit a large sum might be considered more of a flight risk, as they could more easily leave the country.
- Previous violations: A history of violating bail conditions, such as failing to appear in court, can lead a court to refuse bail in the future.
Consequences of flight risk
- Denial of bail: A high flight risk can be grounds for a court to deny bail entirely.
- Stricter conditions: Even if bail is granted, a high flight risk may result in more stringent conditions, such as a higher bail amount or the requirement of a personal bond.
- Revocation of bail: If a person on bail flees, their bail can be revoked, and they may be taken back into custody until the trial.
Important considerations
- Balancing rights: Courts try to balance the defendant’s rights with the community’s safety and the integrity of the legal process.
- Potential for bias: There is a concern that assessments of flight risk can be unfairly influenced by socioeconomic status, where a lack of assets is incorrectly interpreted as a higher risk.
- Legal advice: It is recommended to consult with a lawyer, as they can help navigate the complexities of bail hearings and the factors involved in determining flight risk.
Analysis By Courts
Court will then evaluate factual backdrop relating to right to travel abroad. Article 21 provides protection to its citizens as far as their right to travel is concerned. Any restriction imposed has to be based on a justifiable cause and satisfy the test of proportionality. In the absence of any cogent evidence showing that the petitioners had misused their previous permissions or attempted to flee from justice, the Court will rarely stop them from travelling abroad.
Punjab & Haryana High Court (Order dated 27.05.2024 in C.W.P. No. 3201/2022) is relevant here to quote and understand the topic.
Personal liberty cannot be sacrificed in the absence of concrete justification.
It is a matter of settled law that no person can be barred from applying for permission to go abroad or for seeking further extension if permission has been granted and it is only when the application is filed for permission to go abroad or for extension then it is in the facts and circumstances which prevail at that time, after hearing the concerned parties, the Court is required to either accept the application or reject the same. The condition imposed in the impugned order if sustained would take away the right of the petitioner to apply for permission to go abroad or to seek further extension of his stay abroad which would be infringement of the fundamental rights of the petitioner and thus, the said condition is not sustainable.
Ankur Gupta vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 20 September, 2023
Read this judgment Above.
This Court is required to draw a balance between the right of the petitioner to travel abroad and also right of the prosecution to duly prosecute the petitioner so as to prevent him from evading the trial. From perusal of the various judgments passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India as well as this Court, it is clear that paramount consideration is given to the conditions imposed upon the persons who have been granted the permission to go abroad, so as to ensure that they do not flee from justice.
In the present case, keeping in view the facts and circumstances, moreso the fact that the petitioner does not own any property in his own name in India. Read here.
Permission to Travel Abroad in case of a PO, read this ruling here. Wherein court granted the relief but stringent conditions were put. The reason propelling the petitioner is the family dispute that his daughter is going through. It would rather be a primary concern for the petitioner, as a father, to be close with his daughter in this hour of her need. Initiation of a criminal proceeding does not ipso facto amount to denial of all the fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution of India. Unsubstantial apprehensions founded on perceptions do not subscribe to the constitutional objectives. Denial of any such request without any real and tangible basis would rather be denial of the right to an accused to pursue his social and family obligations that are inherently embodied in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. From Balbir Singh Dhol vs State Of Punjab on 26 May, 2022
There can be many more rulings to this post but what applies to your case is a different one and has to be examined that only an expert Punjab and Haryana High Court Lawyer in Chandigarh Panchkula Mohali , Derabassi can do. Feel free to connect with them.
More on 99888-17966.
