IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-5690-2026 Date of Decision:-03.02.2026 Vikas Bajaj ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and Ors.

...Respondents CORAM:-HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present: Mr. Rujhan Dhawan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Jasjit Singh Rattu, DAG, Punjab.

*****

AMARJOT BHATTI, J.(Oral)

1. Petitioner – Vikas Bajaj filed petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. read with Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for quashing the restrictions imposed in the para No.8 of the impugned order dated 18.11.2025 (Annexure P-1) passed in CRR No.162 of 2025 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Fazilka.

2. Learned counsel representing petitioner submits that Vikas Bajaj is facing trial in FIR No.91 dated 15.05.2024, under Section 406, 498-A of IPC registered at Police Station City -1, Abohar. During the pendency of said trial, he filed application for going abroad (Annexure P-8) supported by his affidavit. The said application was disposed of by Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Abohar by passing order dated 24.01.2025 (Annexure P-9). The operative part of the order runs as under:-

“5. So, in view of the above observations of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, the permission as sought by the applicant to visit Abroad cannot be out rightly rejected. The petitioner has stated himself to be employed in a private company, which has the business relations Abroad and in order to perform his official duties, the applicant has to visit Abroad in his official capacity. However, this fact is also to be taken into consideration that the presence of applicant before the respective courts, where the litigation is pending has also to be procured and certain conditions are to be imposed upon him, while granting permission to visit Abroad for official purposes. Accordingly, the applicant is allowed to visit Abroad, subject to the following conditions:

i. The applicant shall first put up his appearance before each and every Court where litigation is pending.

ii. He shall submit the security bonds for the sum of Rs. 10 lacs before this Court, before visiting Abroad.

iii. He will have to ensure his presence before the respective courts whenever it is specifically ordered, without any condition, and will not dispute his identity.

iv. He will provide the details of his Passport, contact number and e-mail IDs, to the court and will also provide the details of his visit Abroad i.e. in which country he will be visiting, alongwith the time and date of departure and arrival.”

Feeling aggrieved of this order, complainant Parveen Sachdeva filed CRR No.162 of 2025 decided on 18.11.2025 (Annexure P-1) where it was observed in para No.8 that the said order was in operation till December 2025 and this order could not be assumed and presumed to be operative for going abroad in the year 2026.

Now it is pointed out that the aforesaid observation made by learned Sessions Judge, Fazilka is unjustified and the same is liable to be quashed.

3. On advance notice, Mr. Jasjit Singh Rattu, DAG, Punjab appeared

on behalf of State. He opposed the present petition on the ground that in the application filed by the petitioner before the trial court (Annexure P-8), neither any specific time period nor specific country was mentioned where this petitioner wanted to visit. Even the order passed by learned Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Abohar dated 24.01.2025 was vague and open. The said order was rightly challenged by filing criminal revision which was disposed of vide impugned order dated 18.11.2025 (Annexure P-1). The trial in this case is at initial stage. Therefore, the petitioner without any cause, valid reason cannot be permitted to go abroad as it was ordered earlier by Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Abohar.

4. I have considered the arguments advanced before me and have gone through the record carefully. Now it is well settled principle that a citizen has a right to travel abroad and to earn his livelihood by going abroad. The c