Delhi High Court
CRL.M.C./5422/2026 of BIMAL RAMGOPAL AGGARWAL Vs DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT on 12 August 2026
Page 1 of 3 $~96 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010341032026 + CRL.M.C. 5422/2026 BIMAL RAMGOPAL AGGARWAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Anurag Bhatt, Mr.Lokesh Pathak and Mr.Vaibhav Vijayvargiya, Advocates. versus DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT .....Respondent Through: Mr.
$~96
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
#
CNR No. DLHC010341032026
+
CRL.M.C. 5422/2026
BIMAL RAMGOPAL AGGARWAL
.....Petitioner
Through:
Mr.
Anurag
Bhatt,
Mr.Lokesh
Pathak
and
Mr.Vaibhav
Vijayvargiya, Advocates.
versus
DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT
.....Respondent
Through:
Mr. Rahul Tyagi, SC for ED with
Mr. Sangeet Sibou, Ms. Priya Rai,
Mr. Avinash Kumar Singh, Mr.
Shubham
Goyal,
Mr.
Aniket
Kumar Singh, Mr. Priyansh Raj
Singh, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
% 12.08.2026
1. By way of the present petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner assails the order dated 22.07.2026 passed by the learned Sessions Court, whereby the petitioner’s application seeking permission to travel abroad for a period of 75 days to various countries came to be dismissed.
2. By order dated 31.07.2026, the petitioner was directed to place on record a revised itinerary proposing travel to a limited number of countries for a shorter duration. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner has filed an affidavit dated 03.08.2026 stating that he now intends to undertake a 30-day trip. The petitioner has accordingly placed on record a revised itinerary for travel to the United Arab Emirates and Thailand during the period from 25.08.2026 to 23.09.2026. However, no travel arrangements, including confirmed flight bookings and accommodation details, have been placed on record.
3. Mr. Anurag Bhatt, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that India has extradition treaties with both the aforesaid countries.
4. In the aforesaid circumstances, particularly in view of the fact that the relief now sought has not yet been sought before the learned Trial Court, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the learned Trial Court by way of an appropriate application. If such an application is made, the learned Trial Court may consider the same on its own merits and in accordance with law.
5. In the context of the observations made by the learned Trial Court in its order dated 22.07.2026, it is clarified that the order dated 29.05.2026 passed by this Court in CRL.REV.P. 351/2026 was not intended to preclude the petitioner from seeking permission to travel abroad. Rather, paragraphs 2 and 3 of the said order expressly contemplated that, in the event the petitioner approached the learned Sessions Court, any subsequent application seeking permission to travel abroad could be considered by the learned Sessions Court on its own merits and in accordance with law.
6. The petition, alongwith pending application, is disposed of with these observations.
7. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case or on any application that may be filed by the petitioner hereafter, which shall be considered by the appropriate Court on its own merits, in accordance with law. PRATEEK JALAN, J AUGUST 12, 2026 SS/SD/