HC Eases Foreign Travel Bail Terms For Karti P. Chidambaram

The Delhi High Court has granted relief to Karti P. Chidambaram, modifying the conditions of his bail in the ongoing INX Media corruption case. In an order passed by Justice Ravinder Dudeja, the court ruled that the requirement for obtaining prior permission from the trial court before embarking on foreign travel for certain countries has been replaced with a mandatory intimation process.

The Background of the Dispute

The legal proceedings stem from a 2017 FIR registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against Karti Chidambaram and several corporate entities, including INX Media, for alleged irregularities involving foreign investment approvals. Following his arrest in 2018, the High Court granted him regular bail, which included a condition requiring him to seek the trial court's permission for every instance of foreign travel.

Over the years, the applicant argued that this condition had become increasingly onerous. As a businessman active in the tennis circuit and the father of a student at the University of Oxford, Mr. Chidambaram frequently needed to travel across Europe and beyond. His counsel submitted that despite multiple trips authorized by the courts, he had maintained a flawless record of compliance, never failing to return or seeking unnecessary adjournments.

Arguments from Both Sides

The petitioner’s legal team emphasized that the investigation against him in the primary case is largely complete, with the charge sheet already filed. They contended that keeping a Rs. 1 crore fixed deposit as security sufficiently safeguards the judicial process, and the existing requirement served more as a source of procedural delay than a necessity for trial security.

Conversely, the CBI strongly opposed the plea. The agency argued that the gravity of the corruption allegations, combined with the fact that he remains an accused in other high-profile investigations like the Aircel-Maxis case, justified a strict monitoring mechanism. The CBI maintained that the accused remained a potential flight risk and that the bail conditions were essential for ensuring his availability for the upcoming trial.

Legal Analysis and Principles

The court’s decision was rooted in the constitutional guarantee of liberty under Article 21. Citing the principle laid down in the Supreme Court case of * Sanjay Chandra v. CBI *, Justice Dudeja noted that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused, not to punish them indefinitely or restrict their professional mobility.

The judge further highlighted the judgment in * Nikunj v. State of Maharashtra *, where the Supreme Court observed that requiring prior court permission for every trip can be unnecessarily prejudicial.

Key Observations

The High Court's reasoning is underscored by several pivotal observations:

• "It is well settled that bail conditions, though necessary to ensure the fair administration of justice, must not be so onerous as to infringe upon the liberty of the accused under Article 21 of the Constitution."
• "The object of imposing such restrictions is only to secure the presence of the accused during trial, not to curtail his legitimate business or personal pursuits."
• "The CBI’s apprehension that the applicant is a flight risk is unsubstantiated, especially when the applicant has, over the years, travelled abroad multiple times under judicial permission and returned promptly."

The Final Order

The High Court has directed that for visits to the United Kingdom, Spain, France, Austria, Italy, Germany, the United States, and Saudi Arabia, Karti Chidambaram no longer needs prior court permission. Instead, he is required to provide the trial court and the investigating agency with a full itinerary, travel duration, and contact details at least two weeks before each trip.

This decision marks a significant refinement in how bail conditions are handled for high-profile undertrials, shifting the focus from "permission-based" surveillance to "intimation-based" compliance, provided the individual’s trail of cooperation remains unblemished. All other existing bail conditions, however, remain in full force.