The court noted that the right to life and liberty, as enshrined in the Constitution, must be considered when addressing travel requests by accused individuals. This provision, according to the judge, overrides the need for restrictive measures unless there is a direct risk of the accused absconding or interfering with the investigation.
Karti Chidambaram, the son of former Union Finance Minister P. Chidambaram, has been under scrutiny for his alleged role in facilitating regulatory clearances for the Aircel Maxis deal and the INX Media case during his father's tenure. The charges against him include money laundering, bribery, and criminal conspiracy, which have attracted significant attention in political and legal circles.
The Aircel Maxis case pertains to the approval granted to a foreign investment in the telecom sector, which allegedly involved kickbacks and illegal transactions. In the INX Media case, Karti is accused of using his influence to secure government clearances for the company in exchange for illicit payments. These cases have led to multiple rounds of legal battles, with Chidambaram and his son both denying any wrongdoing.
The court's ruling is viewed as a victory for the defence, but it has also sparked a debate on whether such permissions could potentially undermine the credibility of ongoing investigations. Legal experts are divided on whether allowing travel in cases of financial misconduct sets a dangerous precedent. Some argue that allowing accused individuals to travel freely could provide them with opportunities to tamper with evidence or flee the country, while others maintain that the right to personal freedom should not be curtailed without compelling evidence.
Chidambaram’s legal team has emphasised that their client is fully cooperating with the investigation and that there is no risk of him evading trial. They also pointed out that Karti's international travel is not linked to any further criminal activities, but rather to his personal and professional commitments, including meetings related to his business ventures.
The ruling has also raised questions about the treatment of political figures accused of corruption. Karti's case has been heavily politicised, with critics arguing that the legal process is being used to target opposition leaders while others suggest that the charges against him are politically motivated. His supporters claim that the cases are part of a broader effort to malign the reputation of the Chidambaram family, with the investigations serving as a tool of political persecution.