Yogita Bhardwaj v. State (Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi) & ANR.

$~25 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 2047/2024 & CRL.M.A. 11016/2024 YOGITA BHARDWAJ .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Vikas Sharma, Mr. Pradeep Kumar Nirvan, Mr. Surya Kumar and Mr. Rajat Nagar, Advs.

versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR .....Respondents Through:

Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP with SI Narender Singh, PS CR Park Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar and Mr.

Manish Kumar Vikkey, Advs. for complainant

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

O R D E R

% 11.07.2024 1.

Petition under Section 482 CrPC has been filed seeking quashing of the impugned order dated 13.02.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissing the permission to travel abroad. 2.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that as per the FIR the complainant had met one Shilpi who had introduced her to two persons on 18.12.2015 and 18.05.2016 but in fact, as per the passport of the petitioner she was not in India on those two dates. It has further been submitted that the petitioner has never ever met the complainant on the dates mentioned in the complaint in regard to which the complaint is patently false.

3.

It is further submitted that even though the FIR was registered against her, she was not aware of the registration of the FIR. She landed in India on The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 10:20:54

10.08.2022 when she was arrested. Only then, for the first time she came to know about the registration of this FIR against her. 4.

It is submitted that her non-appearance was simply for the reason that she was neither being aware of FIR nor she was aware of the pendency of this case. There was no intention to evade the process of law. It is further submitted that being a national of Australia, she may be permitted to travel to Australia where her husband and children are residing with whatever conditions that may be imposed upon the petitioner. Furthermore, it is asserted that allegations viz-a-viz the petitioner are only to the extent of having taken Rs.4.7 lacs.

5.

Learned APP for the State submits that she is an Australian citizen who had not joined the investigation for last five years. There is flight risk and there is likelihood of not returning back to India to face trial. 6.

Submissions heard.

7.

Learned ASJ has observed the factum of the petitioner being the national of Australia and having been declared a Proclaimed Offender on 30.10.2018 after which the LOC was opened. It is only when she came to India on 11.08.2023 that she was arrested and subsequently released on bail. 8.

The family of the petitioner is based in Australia which has essentially been cited as the reason to travel to Australia. 9.

I find merit in the submissions of learned APP. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J JULY 11, 2024/ns The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 10:20:54