IMPORTANT POINT
The court reinforced that bail conditions for foreign nationals accused of serious crimes must prioritize the integrity of the judicial process and the risk of flight.

ORDER :

1. The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order dated 04-09-2023 passed by the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore in Crime No. 8 of 2021, whereby the concerned Court denies travel to the petitioner in modification of bail conditions.

2. Heard Sri Suhaib Fazeel Madar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri Harish Ganapathi, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No. 1 and Sri H. Shanthi Bhushan, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for respondent No. 3.

3. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows:

The petitioner, a lady, is a Chinese national. She comes to India in the year 2017 and is married to one Anas Ahmed, an Indian national currently residing in Bangalore. On certain allegations, a complaint comes to be registered by the 2nd respondent, a payment gateway, Razorpay Software Private Limited against the husband of the petitioner which becomes a crime in Crime No. 8 of 2021 for offences punishable under Section 420 of the IPC and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2008 (‘the Act’ for short). The crime is registered by the Cyber Crime Police. In connection with registration of crime, the premises of the petitioner and office were searched and seizure of various documents including passport and identity cards takes place. The petitioner comes to be arrested.

4. The petitioner seeks grant of bail from the hands of the Court of Sessions in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 5035 of 2021. The petitioner was granted bail but on certain conditions. One of the conditions was that she shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission. The petitioner then prefers another petition before the Court of Sessions in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 5863 of 2021 seeking modification of bail conditions as obtaining in Section 439(1)(b) of the Cr.P.C. The petition comes to be allowed in part and bail conditions 2 to 7 were relaxed. But, the condition that she should not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission was retained. After about a year, on the ground that the father of the petitioner who is about 80 years old undergoing medical treatment in China and is bedridden, the petitioner moves one more petition before the Court of Sessions in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 4710 of 2023 again under Section 439(1)(b) of the Cr.P.C. seeking relaxation of bail conditions, which would be to leave the country from 09-06-2023 to 30-08-2023. This comes to be rejected. Therefore, the petitioner has preferred the subject petition seeking travel permission, to be with her father, who is now 80 years old and is said to be bedridden.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would vehemently contend that though crimes are registered all around, in none of the cases the petitioner has suffered any order of ban on travel beyond the shores of the nation. He would submit that even the High Court of Kerala has permitted the petitioner to go to China and come back in two cases where crimes are registered within the jurisdiction of Kerala High Court. He would contend that her travel is imperative, failing which she will lose the opportunity of being with her father in his last days.

6. Per-contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader would refute the submissions to contend that it is not one but 7 crimes are registered against the petitioner and her husband in a scam which is popularly known as ‘Power Bank scam’. Therefore, the reason projected by the petitioner should not be adhered to and the petitioner should not be permitted to escape the clutches of law, as once she goes to China, it would be impossible to get her back.

7. The learned Deputy Solicitor General of India representing the 3rd respondent/Ministry of External Affairs, which was directed to be impleaded, as the issue related to immigration, would again vehemently oppose the petition contending that the petitioner is of a doubtful background. She comes to Ind