1. An accused person seeks modification of a bail condition to travel abroad for academic research and presentation, despite facing charges under various statutes, including the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 5 , 6 , 7 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 23663
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Amit Bansal, J
Natasha Narwal – Appellant
Versus
State NCT of Delhi – Respondent
CRL.M.C. 7711/2026 | CRL.M.A. 32132/2026 | CRL.M.C. 7724/2026 | CRL.M.A. 32165/2026
Important Points
The right to travel abroad is a facet of the fundamental right to life and liberty under Article 21. Permission for travel for academic purposes can be granted to a bail recipient facing serious charges (including UAPA) if suitable safeguards are implemented and no bail conditions were previously violated.
Subject
Criminal - Bail/Travel Permission
Act Referred
Indian Penal Code: S.147, S.148, S.149, S.186, S.353, S.283, S.332, S.333, S.323, S.307, S.302, S.427, S.120B, S.34, S.188, S.109, S.114, S.124A, S.153A, S.201, S.212, S.295, S.341, S.395, S.420, S.435, S.436, S.452, S.454, S.468, S.471
Arms Act, 1959: S.25, S.27
Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984: S.3, S.4
Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967: S.13, S.16, S.17, S.18
Constitution of India: Art.21
Passports Act, 1967
Arms Act, 1959: S.25, S.27
Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984: S.3, S.4
Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967: S.13, S.16, S.17, S.18
Constitution of India: Art.21
Passports Act, 1967
Headnote
(A) Right to Travel Abroad - Fundamental Rights - The right to travel abroad is a facet of the fundamental right to life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and no person shall be deprived of the same except in accordance with the procedure established by law. (Para 14)
(B) Bail Conditions - Travel Permission - Permission to travel abroad for academic purposes, such as presenting a research paper at an international conference and meeting PhD supervisors, may be granted even where the accused faces serious charges under the UAPA, provided there is no history of bail violation and suitable safeguards are implemented. (Para 15, 19, 21)
Issues: Whether the petitioner, facing charges under UAPA and other laws, can be permitted to travel to the UK for academic purposes despite the Trial Court's rejection.
(B) Bail Conditions - Travel Permission - Permission to travel abroad for academic purposes, such as presenting a research paper at an international conference and meeting PhD supervisors, may be granted even where the accused faces serious charges under the UAPA, provided there is no history of bail violation and suitable safeguards are implemented. (Para 15, 19, 21)
Issues: Whether the petitioner, facing charges under UAPA and other laws, can be permitted to travel to the UK for academic purposes despite the Trial Court's rejection.
Legal Category Hierarchy
- constitutional law
- practice and procedure
- crime and sentencing
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Adit S. Pujari, Chaitanya Sundriyal, Manvender Singh Shekhawat, Harshvardhan Pushkin Sharma
For the Respondents: S.V. Raju, Madhukar Pandey, Ayodhya Prasad, Dhruv Pande, Aarush Bhatia, Saravjeet Singh, Ishika Singla
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Adit S. Pujari, Chaitanya Sundriyal, Manvender Singh Shekhawat, Harshvardhan Pushkin Sharma
For the Respondents: S.V. Raju, Madhukar Pandey, Ayodhya Prasad, Dhruv Pande, Aarush Bhatia, Saravjeet Singh, Ishika Singla
Table of Contents
2. Petitioner asserts the necessity of international travel for academic purposes and roots in society, while the state opposes based on potential extradition difficulties and the availability of virtual alternatives. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 )
3. The court acknowledges the fundamental right to travel as part of personal liberty and balances the nature of allegations against the genuine, time-bound academic requirements of the petitioner. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 )
4. The right to travel is a facet of the fundamental right to life and liberty under Article 21, and shall not be curtailed solely due to pending serious criminal charges. (Para 14 , 19 )
5. The court permits the petitioner to travel abroad for a limited period subject to strict conditions including undertakings, personal bonds, and the requirement to return and surrender the passport. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 )
6. Is the fundamental right to travel abroad absolute for an accused person on bail?
No, while the right to travel abroad is a facet of Article 21 of the Constitution, it is subject to the procedure established by law and can be regulated by bail conditions ensuring the accused's availability for trial. (Para 14 , 19 )
7. Does the pendency of charges under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) act as an absolute bar to foreign travel?
No, the gravity of the offences, including UAPA, does not create a blanket prohibition against foreign travel. Courts weigh the genuineness of the request and the risk of flight against the accused’s rights. (Para 19 , 21 )
8. What factors are relevant when considering a request to travel abroad by an accused granted bail?
Relevant factors include the depth of the accused's roots, their compliance with existing bail conditions, the genuine necessity of the travel, the likelihood of return, and the feasibility of imposing safeguards to ensure trial attendance. (Para 10 , 18 , 20 , 21 , 22 )
AMIT BANSAL, J. (Oral)
1. The present petitions have been filed seeking setting aside of the orders dated 6th October, 2026, passed by the ASJ (Special Judge), Shahdara District, Karkardooma Courts in Sessions Case 163/2020 and Sessions Case 354/2022, whereby the applications filed by the petitioner to travel to United Kingdom (‘UK’) from 2nd November, 2026 to 1st December, 2026, have been rejected.
2. The aforesaid two cases arise from the following FIRs:
i. FIR 50/2020 (now investigated by PS Crime Branch) registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 186, 353, 283, 332, 333, 323, 307, 302, 427, 120B, 34, 188 Indian Penal Code; Sections 25, 27 Arms Act, 1959; and Sections 3,4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 registered with P.S. Jafrabad.
ii. FIR 59/2020 dated 6th March, 2020 registered under Sections 120B , 109, 114, 124A, 147, 148, 149, 153A, 186, 201, 212, 295, 302, 307, 341, 353, 395, 420, 427, 435, 436, 452, 454, 468, 471, 34 of the IPC; Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 (‘Arms Act’); Sections 13, 16, 17, 18 of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967 (‘UAPA’) and Sections 3 and 4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 registered with P.S. Special Cell.
3. In FIR No.50/2020 as referred above, the applicant has been granted bail by the Trial Court vide order dated 17th September, 2020. In FIR No.59/2020, the applicant has been granted bail by the Division Bench of this Court on 15th June, 2021. One of the conditions in the bail order passed by the Division Bench of this Court was that the petitioner shall surrender her passport before the Trial Court and shall not travel out of the country without prior permission of the Trial Court.
4. Mr. Adit S. Pujari, counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that charges are yet to be framed in both the cases.
5. It is stated that after being granted bail, the petitioner began to pursue a PhD programme from School of Law, University of Warwick, UK. The petitioner has been admitted on 2nd October, 2023 in the PhD programme.
6. The petitioner’s paper “Gendered Carceral Labour as Social Reproduction” has been accepted in the annual conference to be held at School of Oriental and African Studies, London from 5th November, 2026 to 8th November, 2026.
7. The passport of the petitioner has been deposited before the Trial Court. The petitioner moved an application before the Trial Court seeking permission to travel to United Kingdom from 2nd November, 2026 to 1st December, 2026 to attend the aforementioned annual conference and also to visit her University to meet with her PhD Supervisors. The said application was opposed by the respondent. The Trial Court vide impugned order dated 6th October, 2026, has dismissed the application filed by the petitioner primarily on the ground that there are serious allegations against the petitioner under the UAPA.
8. Mr. Pujari submits that the petitioner intends to travel to United Kingdom purely for academic pursuits as the petitioner’s research paper is to be presented before an International conference and also to meet her PhD Supervisors at the University of Warwick, UK.
9. Attention of the Court has been drawn to letter dated 21st September, 2026, sent by her PhD Supervisors wherein the petitioner has been invited to present her work to the academic staff and post graduate researchers.
10. Mr. Pujari submits that the petitioner has deep roots in the society and undertakes that she will return back to the country on 2nd December, 2026. He submits that the brother of the petitioner, who resides in Haryana, is willing to stand as a surety.
11. Reply has been filed on behalf of the respondent opposing the request of the petitioner to travel abroad.
12. Mr. S.V. Raju, ASG appearing on behalf of the State, submits that the United Kingdom has very strict extradition laws and if the petitioner decides to seek asylu
