KARTHIK PARTHIBAN V THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE AND OTHERS, 2024 L (MAD) 370
Facts: The Madras High Court was hearing a petition filed by Karthik Parthiban, a Seychelles citizen, who was stuck in India due to a Look Out Circular (LOC) issued by the CBI. Parthiban sought to quash the LOC, arguing that his company was accused of a large-scale financial scam, and as the company’s Director, he played a key role in diverting funds. Parthiban contended that his mental and physical health had deteriorated due to his father being assaulted, abducted, and robbed. He sought permission to travel to Malaysia to visit his family. Parthiban relied on the Manke Gandhi case to argue that his right to a dignified life under Article 21 should allow him to travel abroad, even though he was a foreign citizen. The CBI opposed the plea, arguing that Article 21 did not extend to foreign citizens in cases involving economic fraud and that allowing him to leave the country would result in him evading the investigation, leading to a loss of ₹600 crore to the public.
Issue: Does Article 21 extend to foreign citizens facing trials in India?
Observation: The Madras High Court stayed the LOC issued against Karthik Parthiban, permitting him to travel to Malaysia. The Court emphasized that the criminal justice system should ensure that the accused submits to the jurisdiction of the courts and participates in the trial, but should not interfere with how the accused lives his life. The Court recognized that even an accused person has the right to a dignified life. The Court agreed to stay the LOC but imposed conditions to ensure Parthiban’s return for the trial. It directed him to submit a detailed travel plan to both the trial court and the CBI, travel strictly according to the schedule, and reside at the address provided in Malaysia. The Court further ordered Parthiban to surrender his passport to the Indian High Commission in Malaysia, to collect it only before returning to India, and to notify the CBI of the surrender.
