IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 7774 OF 2025 Between: Peddabaliyarisimhuni Sai Vamsi Mohan Varma, S/o P.Venkata Surya Narayana Raju, Aged 29 years, Present Address15 Baylawn Circle; Brampton City, Ontario Province, CANADA, Postal Code L6P 2M6. Local Residence D.No.4-96/37/4, Gopala Krishna Nagar, Road No.4, Sujathanagar, Pendurthi, Visakhapatnam. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The Union of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Bureau of Immigration, Rep, by its Commissioner, East Block VIII, Level IV, Sector-1 R.K Puram New Delhi. 2. The Ministry of External Affairs, Rep, by its Secretary, Government of India, Patiala House, Tilak Marg- Sector-1 R.K Puram New Delhi. 10001 3. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principle Secretary to Home Department, Amaravati, Andhr'a Pradesh. 4. The Immigration officer, Rajiv Gandhi International Airport, Shamshabad, Hyderabad, Ministry of Home affairs, Government of ^ India. 5. The Commissioner of Police, Visakhapatnam Police Commissionerate, Visakhapatnam, AP 6. The Assistant Commissioner, Women Police Station, Endada, Visakhapatnam ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3,5 6 respondents in issuing the Lookout Circular (LOC) and continuing further against the petitioner Pass Port.No.N6107293 in connection with the Crime.No. 140/2024, dt20-05-2024 on the file of 6*^ respondent having intercepted him by the 4*^ respondent officials and released on executing illegal, arbitrary, unjust and the personal bonds on 23-02-2025 as contrary to law and the orders of this Hon’ble court in WP.No.325/2025 dt22-01-2025 and set aside the same or consequently direct the respondents.3, 5 & 6 to withdraw the lookout circular (LOC) issued against the petitioner Pass Port.No.N6107293 with in one from today enabling the petitioner to travel from RGIA, Hyderabad to Canada on 20- 04-2025 forthwith and necessary in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 15i CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in suppprt of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 3, 5 & 6 to withdraw the lookout circular (LOG) issued against the petitioner Pass Port.No.N6107293 forthwith by enabling the petitioner to travef from RGIA, Hyderabad to Canada on 20-04-2025 pending disposal of the above writ petition in view of his clear acquittal in criminal case. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI G. SEENA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1,2 & 4: SMT. P. VIJAYA KUMARI (CENTRAL GOVT. COUNSEL) Counsel for the Respondent Nos'3,5 & 6: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER T APHC010151872025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 7774/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER Peddabaliyarisimhuni Sal Vamsi Mohan Varma AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The Union Of India and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.GSEENA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR HOME 2.P VIJAYA KUMARI(CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL) The Court made the following ORDER: Heard Sri B.Seena Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ajay, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondents 3, 5 & 6 and Smt.Vijaya Kumari, learned counsel for respondents 1, 2 & 4. The above writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondents 3, 5 and 6 in issuing the Lookout Circular (LOG) and continuing further against the petitioner’s passport No.N6107293 in connection with Crime no.140 of 2024 dated 20.05.2024, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner i: permanent resident of Brampton city, Ontario Province, Canada. The marriage of the petitioner’s brother was performed on 15.02.2023 with one Shanmukhi Amurtha Sai Santohoshini. The petitioner came down t India and again returned to Canada on 04.03.2023. In connection with the marriage disputes between the petitioner’s brother and his wife, a Crime No.140 of 2024 was filed on the file of Disha Police Station, Visakhapatnam against the petitioner’s brother, petitioner and his parents. The petitioner is shown as Accused No.4. The petitioner is not aware of the said crime. IS (b) When the petitioner came down to India on 23.02.2025, the Immigration officials caught hold and released on bail. Later, the petitioner came to know about registration of Crime No. 140 of 2024. Following the information, the 6^^ respondent issued Lookout Circular to the petitioner 25.02.2025. The petitioner submitted sureties. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that issuance of LCC and further continuing the is violation of the Cffice Memorandum dated 22.02.2021 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs. Learned counsel would further submit that issuance of LCC is against the law laid down by this Court and Apex Court. Learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted the instructions of the 6 respondent wherein it is stated that if the petitioner is permitted to move to Canada, he may not attend the trial proceedings and it will cause injustice to the complainant. Eventually prayed to dismiss the writ petition. Heard all the learned counsel. 4. on same 5. 6. 7. The Look Cut Circular (LCC) has not been defined anywhere legally. N Sumer Singh Saikan vs. Assistant Director’s case in W.P.(Crl.)no.1315 of 2008 and Crl.Ref.No.1 of 2006, High Court of Delhi held that LCC can be taken by investigating agency in cognizable offences under IPC or other penal laws where the accused was deliberately evading arrest or not appearing in the trial Court despite NBWs and other coercive measures and if there is any 3 likelihood of accused leaving the country to evade trial/arrest and only in those circumstances, LOC can be opened as against the accused therein. It is trite that the recourse can be had for issue of LOC by the police only in drastic contingencies. Without there being any proper procedure followed, coming to conclusion to issue LOC, is bad. In W.P.No.12687 of 2022, dated 02.05.2022 a learned single judge of this Court held as hereunder; “POINT: ....It is trite that the recourse can be had for (2015) 3 ALT 15 issue of LOC only in extreme cases where the investigating agency establishes that the accused in cognizable cases deliberately evaded arrest or not appeared despite issuing of NBW and other coercive measures and also that there was every likelihood of accused absconding from the Country so as to not to submit to the jurisdiction of the concerned Criminal Court and thereby to evade arrest / trial and other criminal proceedings. In Sumer Singh Salkan’s case cited by the learned counsel for the petitioners the High Court of Delhi reiterated the above aspect as to under what circumstance recourse to the LOC can be taken. 8. Be that it may, the present case is concerned, admittedly, we are not at the stage of issuing of LOC since it was already issued and pending against the petitioners. However what is germane for consideration is whether the LOC can be allowed to be continued against the petitioners when in the charge-sheet filed by the police, they gave clean chit to them. To confirm whether the police laid charge-sheet and exonerated petitioners or not, this Court through Registrar (Judicial) called for relevant information from the Court of Judicial Magistrate of I Class for Trial of Prohibition & Excise Offices-cum-FAC JMFC Mobile Court, Nellore. Learned magistrate vide letter dated 29.04.2022 sent the relevant information stating that in Crime No. 231/2021 the Sub-Inspector of Police, Disha Police Station, Nellore laid 8. charge-sheet against accused Nos.1 to 3 on 6 24.09.2021 while mentioning that he found no involvement of accused Nos.4 and 5 i.e., the petitioners herein and thereby not charge- sheeted them. Learned magistrate further intimated that the charge-sheet came up for consideration before him 02.03.2022 and on perusal of the record he found prime facie case against the accused Nos. 1 to 3 but found no incriminating material against the accused Nos. 4 and 5 in the charge-sheet on and hence he issued notice to de facto complainant directing her appearance before the Court on 25.04.2022 for filing objections if any. Accordingly de facto complainant appeared before the Court on 25.04.2022 and sought time for filing protest petition and hence learned magistrate extended the time till 03.06.2022.” 9. By virtue of opening the LOG, the personal liberty of the person is curtailed. The LOCs are only the circular instructions that have been issued by the respohdent/police only with a view to detain a person or to see that he will cooperate with the trial. Of late, in each and every case that has been registered under Section 498-A IPC, it has become respondent/police without looking into the aspects whether the petitioner i: cooperating with the trial or he is evading arrest, in mechanical manner are opening the LOCs. It is essential that the police have to open LOCs against the persons who are the accused for grave offences or the persons who are involved in financial irregularities or the offences which Society. In such cases, the respondent/police can resort in opening the LOCs against the accused in not permitting them to leave the accusation against the accused persons is such that it is detrimental to the Nation, then LOC can be issued. common for the IS are against the country. If the 10. In the case at hand, the crime registered against the petitioner and others is under Section 498-A IPC r/w Sections 3 and Act. The offences are not 4 of Dowry Prohibition grave. By virtue of opening LOC, personal liberty so 5 < of the petitioner would be affected. On mere registration of FIR for the offences under Section 498-A of ICP r/w 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, the respondent police if come to conclusion to open the LOG against the accused, it will affect the career of the petitioner. In most of the cases, it may end in compromise or it will take much time for the case to come up for hearing. By virtue of opening of the Look Out Circular, it will be a hurdle for the petitioner to travel abroad. Given the discussion supra, coupled with the expressions in the aforementioned orders and in the facts and circumstances of the case, opening and continuing LOG against the petitioner herein is nothing but abuse of process of Court. Hence, the LOG issued against the petitioner herein is hereby quashed. 11. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. No order as to costs. 12. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- N NAGAMMA assistant registrar //TRUE COPY// SECT!'^OFFICER To, of Home Affairs, Union of India, Bureau of immigration, East Block Vll, Level IV, Seotor-1 R.K Puram New Delhi. 2. The secretary. Ministry of External Affairs, Government of Indra, Patiala 1. The Commissioner, Ministry 1 R.K Puram New Delhi. 10001 Department, State of Andhra Pradesh House, Tilak Marg- Sector- 3. The Principle Secretary to Home Amaravati, Andhra Pradesh. officer, Rajiv Gandhi International Airport, of Home affairs. Government of 4. The Immigration Shamshabad, Hyderabad, Ministry India. 5. The Commissioner of Police, Visakhapatnam, AP Visakhapatnam Police Commissionerate 6. The Assistant Commissioner, Women Police Station, Endada, Visakhapatnam 7. One CC to Sri G. Seena Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] 8. One CC to Smt. P. Vijaya Kumari(Central Govt. Counsel) [OPUC] 9. Two CC’s to GP for Home, High Court of A.P. at Amaravati[OUT] 10. Three CD Copies. ssb HIGH COURT DATED:28/03/2025 ORDER WP.No.7774 of 2025 ALLOWING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS