The Bombay High Court has dismissed the writ petition filed by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) to restrain a businessman who was allegedly involved in activity of misdeclaration and under valuation of imported furniture from attending international furniture fair as the bail cancellation application is pending.
The bench of Justice S.M. Modak has observed that the right to travel abroad is recognized as a fundamental right. Merely because a person is facing prosecution, it does not mean that he cannot travel abroad till the time the investigation is under progress or criminal case is pending. The case is under investigation, that is to say the DRI is in the process of collecting materials.
The bench stated that when such a request is made on the say of the investigator, the Court has to consider whether there is possibility of tampering with the evidence if the permission to travel abroad is granted. There is one more factor which deals with availability of the accused person during the investigation. Ultimately, the Court has to balance right of the investigating agency, on one hand and the right of the person facing prosecution to travel in India and abroad, on the other hand.
The Respondent is an accused in connection with case of undervaluation of imported furniture and customs duty evasion is registered with Directorate of
Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Mumbai for an offence punishable under Section 135(1)(a) and 135(1)(b) of the Customs Act. He was granted bail by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate subject to the condition of surrendering the passport for the period of six months from the date of arrest. He has surrendered the passport. There is a further condition to obtain the permission for travelling abroad.
After this order, the accused applied for returning the passport and sought permission to travel abroad. This permission was sought as there is a furniture fair at Paris from 4 th September 2025 to 8 th September 2025. The trial Court has granted the permission in spite of the objection on behalf of DRI. The order is under challenge.
Dr. Sujay Kantawala, the Counsel on behalf of the accused submitted that permission was granted only for a short period and he justified the right of his client to travel abroad being a fundamental right and to attend the international furniture fair organised at Paris. He produced on record the relevant papers showing the organization of that fair.
Dr. Kantawala submitted that his client undertakes not to meet those exporters.
Primarily, there is opposition for grant of permission for the reason application for cancellation of the bail is pending before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai. The Petitioner apprehends that accused will tamper with the evidence when he will travel to Paris and France. The accused is facing allegations of importing the furniture and other accessories by misdeclaration of the goods and undervaluation of imported furniture. According to DRI the evasion of custom duty is excavated to Rs.30 Crores.
The court opined that merely because investigation is going on, the accused cannot be restrained from attending international furniture fair. Already the learned Magistrate has directed Respondent No.1 to deposit cash surety of Rs.2 lacs with condition to claim refund. One does not know how much time will be taken for hearing of application for cancellation of bail. It is scheduled for hearing on 11th September 2025 whereas till the time of hearing the fair will be over. The permission is granted from 4th September 2025 till 10th September 2025.
The court noted that the accused through his Advocate undertakes that he will return to India and will participate in hearing the application for cancellation of bail. Conduct of international furniture fair depends upon the organisers and it is not that the present Respondent/accused has organised that furniture fair. I am not inclined to stay in the impugned order. There can be an additional condition that Respondent No.1 through his Advocate undertakes not to establish contact with the Exporters who are related to this case.
Case Details
Case Title: Sruti Vijaykumar V/s. Falgun Yogendra Shroff and anr.
Case No.: Criminal Writ Petition No.4670 of 2025
Date: 03rd September 2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Shyamrishi R. Pathak, Sr. standing Counsel
Counsel For Respondent: Dr. Sujay Kantawala
