Presumably there are bail conditions protecting the alleged victim.
The starting point for the Bail Act is that, pre-conviction, everybody is entitled to bail unless the court has substantial fears that the defendant will either:
1. Abscond (i.e. not turn up next time).
2. Interfere withe the course of justice (in particular try to influence witnesses).
3. Commit further offences.
If the court has none of these concerns then unconditional bail must be granted. If they have concerns (which must be supported by evidence and not merely a "hunch") then they can impose conditions, but only to address the concerns. They cannot, for example, impose a curfew on a shoplifter if the fear is that of committing more thefts from shops because confining a person to his home at night will not stop him shoplifting by day.
Unless you know what concern the court had when imposing its conditional bail it is hard to comment. If bail conditions were granted to protect the alleged victim then the defendant going abroad is not going to jeopardise the safety of the victim.