Permission to travel abroad during criminal trial allowed where genuine need and appearance safeguards are shown.

Permission to travel abroad during pendency of a criminal trial may be granted where the request is genuine, supported by a compelling personal circumstance, and the accused's appearance can be secured by suitable safeguards. The HC considered the petitioner's daughter's post-cardiac surgery condition, noted a similar relief granted in another matter, and held that the trial court's refusal could not stand in those circumstances. Permission to visit Canada was therefore allowed up to the specified date, subject to execution of a substantial personal bond, surety, and an undertaking to return and join the proceedings.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to permission to travel abroad during the pendency of the criminal trial, and whether the trial court order declining such permission deserved to be set aside.

Analysis: The petition was under the inherent jurisdiction invoked to assail the refusal of permission to visit Canada. The Court noted the medical communication showing that the petitioner's daughter had undergone cardiac surgery and that parental presence in the post-operative period would assist recovery. The Court also found the request genuine, took note of the comparable order granting similar relief in another matter, and considered that adequate safeguards could be imposed to secure the petitioner's appearance in trial. On that basis, the Court accepted the request to travel abroad up to the specified date, subject to execution of a substantial personal bond and surety with an undertaking to return and join proceedings.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to permission to travel abroad up to 28.04.2018, and the trial court's order refusing such permission was set aside.

---