The Allahabad High Court has clarified that bail does not entitle an accused to travel abroad for personal reasons such as family weddings or leisure trips. The Court emphasized that such permissions can only be granted in cases of pressing necessity, such as medical emergencies or essential official duties.

The ruling came in response to a plea by Aditya Murti, a consultant at Shri Ram Murti Smarak Institute of Medical Sciences, Bareilly, who is facing trial in a CBI-registered case. Murti had sought permission to travel to the United States and France between May 3 and May 22 to attend family functions. His request, initially denied by the Special CBI Court on April 24, was challenged before the High Court.

Murti’s counsel argued that he had previously been allowed to travel abroad on multiple occasions, and had complied with all imposed conditions. It was contended that similar consideration should be extended this time as well.

However, Justice Subhash Vidyarthi rejected the contention, stating that earlier permissions did not confer any vested right to future travel. The Court underlined that bail, while a measure of personal liberty, does not imply unrestricted international movement.

"Permission to travel abroad during trial can only be granted for compelling needs like medical treatment or essential professional obligations. Personal events such as weddings or pleasure trips do not qualify," the Court observed.

It further noted that the trial, pending for over a decade, is now at the stage of defense evidence, and the Supreme Court has directed its expeditious conclusion. Permitting foreign travel at this juncture could delay the proceedings, the Court warned.

Upholding the decision of the Special CBI Court, the High Court dismissed the petition and reiterated that the liberty granted under bail must align with the broader interests of justice and timely trial completion.