Supreme Court Rules on Right to Travel Abroad and Speedy Trial
#GS-2 #Indian Polity & Constitution #Constitution #Fundamental Rights #Judiciary #Judgements & Cases #Current Events #National
Why in News
- The Supreme Court declared that the right to travel abroad under Article 21 is not absolute and must be weighed against the victim's right to a speedy trial and the larger interests of criminal justice.
Supreme Court Observations
- The Supreme Court cancelled a Telangana High Court order that permitted an accused businessman to visit the US for medical care.
- The Supreme Court blamed the High Court for showing too much leniency instead of exercising proper judicial caution while allowing the travel request.
- The Supreme Court noted that comparable medical facilities were available in India, which made the request for foreign travel unnecessary.
Article 21 Restrictions
- The Supreme Court confirmed that the right to travel abroad is an intrinsic component of 'Personal Liberty' under Article 21, but it is not an absolute entitlement and remains bound by the procedure established by law.
- When criminal cases are ongoing against a person, courts cannot judge their fundamental right to travel alone without considering other factors.
- Judges must apply a balancing test to weigh the personal freedom of the accused against the victim's fundamental right to a speedy trial.
- The court highlighted that individual rights must align with the larger societal imperative of ensuring a smooth and effective criminal justice system.