The Supreme Court of India ruled that the fundamental right to travel abroad under Article 21 is not absolute and must be balanced with the victim's right to a speedy trial and the interests of criminal justice.
The Court set aside an order of the Telangana High Court that had allowed an accused businessman to travel to the United States for medical treatment.
It observed that the right to travel abroad is a part of personal liberty under Article 21, but is subject to the "procedure established by law."
The Court said that when criminal proceedings are pending, the accused's right to travel abroad cannot be considered in isolation.
Courts must balance individual liberty with the victim's right to a speedy trial and the effective administration of criminal justice.
The Supreme Court also noted that comparable medical facilities were available in India, reducing the need for foreign travel in the case.