Sometimes in life, we feel the need to step away from our daily struggles, attend a loved one’s wedding or take a break to travel. But when someone is facing serious legal charges and is on bail, their freedom doesn’t come without boundaries. A recent ruling by the Allahabad High Court highlights just that, reminding us that personal joy must take a backseat when justice is in progress.

Court Denies Permission to Travel for Non-Essential Reasons

In a case that stirred public attention, the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court denied foreign travel permission to Aditya Murti, a consultant at the Shri Ram Murti Smarak Institute of Medical Sciences, Bareilly. Murti, who is facing trial in a long-standing CBI case, had requested to travel to the United States to attend a relative’s wedding and then to France for celebrations between May 3 and May 22.

The Allahabad High Court, however, drew a clear line between what is ‘necessary’ and what is ‘optional’ when it comes to allowing an undertrial accused to leave the country. Justice Subhash Vidyarthi, who delivered the judgment, made it clear that there is no inherent right for an accused on bail to seek permission to go abroad, especially not for reasons like a wedding or vacation.

Why This Decision Matters

In its detailed ruling, the Allahabad High Court observed that foreign travel could only be permitted in pressing circumstances, such as for medical treatment or essential official work. Attending a family function, however emotional it may be, does not meet that standard. This perspective shows the balance courts try to maintain, respecting personal emotions while ensuring that justice is not delayed or distracted.

The Court also addressed the petitioner’s argument that he had earlier been granted permission to travel abroad even for non-essential reasons. But the bench made it very clear that just because previous permissions were granted, it doesn’t mean the same privilege can be claimed again, especially when the trial has reached a critical phase where the defence is presenting its evidence.

Justice Must Come First

Aditya Murti has been under trial for over a decade, and the Supreme Court itself had ordered that the case be expedited. When a case reaches such an advanced stage, distractions, even if personal, can slow down justice. The Allahabad High Court decision reflects a growing emphasis on completing long-pending cases without unnecessary delays.

The ruling also sends a strong message that legal accountability must remain a priority over individual comfort. Personal happiness is important, but not at the cost of justice. This decision reminds us that every action during bail is still under the lens of law.

Disclaimer: This article is based on the recent ruling by the Allahabad High Court and aims to explain the legal position in simple and emotional terms. It is written for informational purposes only and does not intend to criticise or question the legal process. The article is 100% unique and does not promote any form of legal bias.

Also Read:

Calcutta High Court Cracks Down on Hecklers Targeting Lawyers

When Law and Love Unite: Supreme Court Applauds Piplantri Tree Tradition

Evolution and Scope of Administrative Law