The Delhi High Court on Tuesday rejected a plea by climate activist Disha Ravi, who is facing prosecution for her alleged involvement in sharing a toolkit linked to the 2021 farmers' protest, seeking modification of the bail condition where she needs prior permission of the trial court before travelling abroad.
She had urged the high court to modify the condition to the extent that she shall intimate the trial court before going abroad.
The high court said the trial court’s order portrayed a fine balancing as "it is not a blanket ban or infringement of her fundamental right to travel abroad but a reasonable restriction by the court meant to enforce through the legal system".
Advertisement
However, the high court directed that in case an application seeking permission to go abroad is filed before the trial court by Ravi at least one month prior to her intended visit, the State shall expeditiously file an appropriate response to it while giving sufficient time to the trial court to pass an order.
The trial court order is such that neither the investigation nor the trial is affected by the absence or non-availability of the accused, while interfering in the most minimal manner with the convenience and fundamental right of the petitioner, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said in the order.
Advertisement
The high court noted there is a reasonable condition of seeking the court’s permission before travelling abroad which has not been denied to her in the past.
Therefore, the prayer regarding deletion of the bail condition imposed through the February 23, 2021 order is rejected, it said.
Ravi was arrested from Bengaluru by a Cyber Cell team of the Delhi Police on February 13, 2021, for allegedly being involved in sharing on social media a toolkit related to the farmers' protest, which was then going on against the Centre's three farm laws, and was granted bail by a trial court here on February 23, 2021.
The trial court had imposed various conditions on her, including that she shall not leave the country without prior permission of the court.
Ravi, in her plea before the high court, sought modification of the bail condition that she should take prior permission from the trial court to travel abroad saying she needs to travel abroad frequently and on short notice.
The bail condition of obtaining prior permission of the trial court is causing inconvenience, her counsel had argued on her behalf.
However, the state's counsel had opposed the plea, saying that merely because the condition is found inconvenient by her, it cannot be a ground for modification.
Advertisement
The high court, in its order, said that merely because the condition imposed by the trial court is causing inconvenience to Ravi, it can neither become a ground for deletion of the condition nor it can be said that the same amounts to a violation of her fundamental right to travel abroad.
“…substantial objective of fair investigation by the State against a person accused of inciting hatred amongst people of the country etc. pending investigation, will overweigh the inconvenience of the individual accused,” the high court said.
It noted that the investigation in the case is pending as the investigating agency is still collecting evidence from foreign intermediaries which are crucial pieces of evidence.
Advertisement
“While the freedom to travel abroad is a cherished right, it is not absolute, and the criminal courts are duty-bound to prevent misuse of liberty of bail by individuals.
"The courts are required to balance the accused's right to personal liberty and the right to travel abroad against the legitimate concerns of ensuring the accused's presence during trial, and protecting the interests of the victims and the State as well as the investigating agency...,” the high court said.
The high court said it does not undermine the petitioner’s fundamental right to have the freedom to travel abroad, but at the same time, it also cannot undermine the right of the prosecuting agency to ensure that the investigation is carried out and completed without any hindrance.
Advertisement
“In this court’s opinion, the trial court while granting bail in this case has taken note of the entire circumstances of the case, and in its wisdom, has imposed a condition that in case the petitioner wishes to visit another country, prior permission of the court will be taken.
The condition for judicial permission before travelling abroad has been imposed "for securing the presence of the petitioner and also to ensure that she is not able to tamper with evidence or influence witnesses,” it said.
-With PTI Input
