Authority: Supreme Court of India, Civil Appellate Jurisdiction (Justices M.M. Sundresh & Augustine George Masih)

Order Date: 16 September 2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: Appellant Rajesh K. Mehta and Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust (the Trust) vs. Respondent HDFC Bank Limited.
  • Background: The Bombay High Court, on 16 July 2026, granted Rajesh K. Mehta permission to travel abroad for 120 days, subject to depositing Rs 7,50,00,000 (₹7.5 crore) as additional security.
  • The appellant contended that the Recovery Officer, DRT‑II Mumbai, had withdrawn the arrest warrant (22 July 2025) and all travel restrictions, rendering the security condition unnecessary.
  • Counsel for the appellant (Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv. & Mr. Devdatt Kamat, Sr. Adv.) argued that the appellant had previously deposited ₹7.5 crore and a total of ₹12 crore, and that no criminal proceedings were pending.
  • The respondent bank argued that the appellant had misrepresented facts and that the High Court’s order should stand.
  • The Supreme Court noted that the appellant had made frequent foreign trips, returned to India, and was not a flight risk. The order of DRT‑II dated 22 July 2025 benefits the appellant.

Observations & Reasoning

  • The Court found no legal bar for the appellant to travel abroad.
  • It recognized that the High Court exercised discretion in imposing the security condition but questioned its magnitude.
  • The Court considered the appellant’s financial capacity, as affirmed by the DRT‑II Recovery Officer.
  • The Trust’s appeal challenging the permission itself was deemed without merit.

Decision

  • The condition to deposit ₹7.5 crore is modified to a reduced security amount of ₹3,00,00,000 (₹3 crore).
  • The appellant must deposit the ₹3 crore in the same manner as directed by the High Court, within three weeks of the order.
  • The High Court is directed to dispose of pending writ petitions W.P. No.3802/2025 and W.P.(L) No.40817/2025 within six months of receiving a copy of this order.
  • The Presiding Officer, DRT‑II Mumbai, is directed to dispose of the pending matter M.A. No.119/2025 in R.P. No.709/2004 within six months of receiving a copy of this order.
  • All pending proceedings must be decided on their merits, without being influenced by observations in this order.
  • Both appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms, and any pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.

Final Outcome

  • The Supreme Court reduced the security deposit requirement to ₹3 crore, set a three‑week compliance deadline, ordered timely disposal of related writ petitions and DRT‑II matters, and dismissed both appeals.

Topics: Travel Permission, Security Deposit, Court Order