Bail fight: Ramdanee seeks five trips abroad before December
Court to rule on 25 August on lifting his travel ban for five business trips.
OCTOBER 17, 2026·PORT LOUIS·PRIYA SEGA
Sanjiv Ramdanee, on bail on a provisional conspiracy charge tied to a Rs 470 million loan to Dhyanavartam Ltd, wants the court's permission to make five business trips abroad before December. The prosecution opposes any partial lifting of his travel ban. A ruling is expected on 25 August.
The request takes the form of a Variation Order. Ramdanee's lawyers argue he needs the trips for company business, saying the firm is under administration and that debt recovery is required to stabilise operations. The defence also invokes the constitutional freedom of movement under section 15, and points to existing bail secured by substantial guarantees and strong family ties in Mauritius.
By contrast, the prosecution, according to the public account of the hearing, argues that employees could represent the company abroad, that a flight risk is genuinely established, and that a provisional charge alone justifies maintaining the full ban. The defence's submissions, including affidavits and documents attached to the motion, are referenced but largely absent from the published record.
The case also turns on a legal standard. The Bail Act requires necessity. The prosecution is pressing for a stricter reading, absolute necessity, which would reserve travel permission for exceptional circumstances.
Meanwhile, the loan at the centre of the underlying case has been described in some media and online coverage as toxic, with suggestions it was obtained through misleading presentations to the bank's board. No board minutes, audit findings or prosecution exhibits are cited in support of those characterisations in the material reported so far. The term "Operation Maradiva" is used by some outlets to group the related proceedings.
The magistrate has yet to rule. The 25 August decision will settle the necessity question and any conditions attached to supervised travel. Until then, the public record rests mainly on one side's submissions, and whether the defence's unseen affidavits shift that balance remains an open question.