Mumbai News: Special CBI Court Denies 6-Month Blanket Foreign Travel Plea To Accused In ₹297 Crore Parekh Aluminex Bank Fraud Case

Mumbai: In the fraud case involving Parekh Aluminex Ltd (PAL), accused of cheating Indian Overseas Bank of Rs 297.56 crore by obtaining credit facilities and failing to clear dues, the special CBI court has refused to grant blanket permission to the eighth accused, businessman Pareen Sanghvi, to travel abroad for six months. Sanghvi had sought leave to travel continuously from June to December 2025.

The court observed that permission for unrestricted international travel cannot be granted without specific cause. Sanghvi is a director in M/s OPUS Refinery Private Limited and Sanghavi Bullion Private Limited, both well-established in the gold refinery business.

He had sought permission to visit a long list of countries – including UAE, Qatar, Singapore, UK, USA, Turkey, Italy, France, Switzerland, Spain, other parts of Europe, Sri Lanka, Maldives, South Africa, Thailand, China, Russia, Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Philippines, Georgia, Kuwait, Australia, and other Asian nations – between June 12 and December 31.

His plea cited business-related reasons such as the import and export of gold and raw ornaments, quality control inspections, and meetings with overseas firms. The defence claimed Sanghvi had been granted similar permissions in the past.

The prosecution opposed the plea, arguing that extended travel to numerous countries could delay the trial and increase the risk of Sanghvi evading proceedings.

After hearing both sides, the court noted that Sanghvi’s request overlaps with a previously granted travel period ending June 19, 2025, indicating a pattern of seeking continuous long-duration permissions without sufficient stay in India.

“While the stated purpose is business-related, including quality control inspection and developing business relations, the application lacks specific details such as firm dates, exact addresses, names of companies, or confirmed appointments. Such generic and prolonged travel requests do not ensure the accused’s presence for trial,” the court order stated.