– “It is a feeling of togetherness as well as support by the mere presence with each other, which is expected by each child and parent while achieving such a milestone. Even if a person is an accused and is facing trial, he should not ordinarily be denied these special moments of small pleasures in life.”
In a benevolent decision the Delhi High Court allowed a Prevention of Money Laundering Act,2002 (PMLA) accused to travel abroad for son’s admission and observed that the Court will not deny moment of togetherness to family and son.
The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed on behalf of petitioner, Parvin Juneja seeking setting aside and modification of impugned order passed by the Special Judge and for grant permission to the petitioner to travel abroad i.e. Canada, Norway and London for admission process of petitioner’s son and for leisure and business travel.
The counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner has been granted permission to travel abroad at least 18 times in past by this Court as well as by the learned Trial Court and he has never misused the liberty so granted. It was also stated that the petitioner wants to go abroad for the purpose of admission of his son in the Schulich School of Business, York University as also for the purpose of business and vacation. It was stated that admission of the petitioner’s son is to start from 05.09.2023.
The Counsel further argued that as far as the ground that petitioner had forged travel documents on a prior occasion is concerned, it is stated that this Court had permitted him to travel abroad thereafter. It is also stated that he has never violated any condition or direction of the Court when he was granted permission to travel abroad.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma observed that “To observe and hold that the son may not need support of the father for the purpose of his admission in the University being grown up, will ignore a very crucial fact of practical life that a child is a child forever for a parent and should be permitted, if circumstances so warrant, when he is entering into a new life in another new country and pursuing journey of higher studies.”
Allowing the accused to travel abroad the Court further stated that “Thus, as a parent, the petitioner’s presence, assistance and support is a precious right as well as moment for the parent, the child and the family, which should be allowed to the petitioner, in the absence of anything reflecting violation of any condition in the past or the petitioner not returning back to the country. This Court will not deny this moment of togetherness to the family and the son and the father at the time of his admission in a university of his choice.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
