IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 8449 OF 2025 iP ■'I .Vs Q il" w 91V\ Between: Korrapati Chandra Sekhar, S/o. Late Korrapati Krishna Murthy, Aged 31 years, Permanent resident of Arun Apartments, Flat No306, Red Hyderabad-500004, State of Telangana, India presently residing Treeble Ct, Greensboro, North Carolina 27406, U.S.A. Hills, at 12 Represented by his General Power Attorney (GPA) Rambabu son of G. Koteswara Rao Gangavarapu aged 62 years resident of 14-21, Penamaluru Mandal, 1681 Jhansi Arcade, Ilird Floor, Main Road, Poranki Rural Krishna Dist. - 521 137, State of A.P. Aadhaar No. 2262 4188 ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Kakinada, Kakinada District, State of Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kakinada Rural District, State of Andhra Pradesh. 4. The Station Hog.se Officer, Samalkot, Kakinada District Pradesh. 5. The Union of India, Bureau of immigration Ministry of Home Affairs by its commissioner Immigration, East Block VIII Puram New Delhi , Kakinada State of Andhra Rep Level V Sector IRK ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to issue praying that in may a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or direction declaring the action of the Respondents originating agency in issuing a Look-out Circular notifying the Petitioners name in the Airports in relation to Crime No. 83 of 2023 of Samalkot or No.2 to 4 being P.S. of Kakinada District on the fiie of the 4*'' Respondent and violative of Articies 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution as illegal, arbitrary of India and LOC issued consequently direct the Respondents to withdraw the said against the Petitioner in relation to Crime No. 83 of 2023 of Samalkot of Kakinada District on the file of the 4'^ Respondent police station enable the petitioner to travel to India in connection with his duties of his employment. P.S. to lA NO: 1 OF 2Q2fi Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances Stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation execution of Look-out Circular notifying the Petitioners name in the Airports in relation to Crime No. 83 of 2023 of Samalkot P.S. of Kakinada District on the file of the 4**^ Respondent pending disposai of this petition as iliegal, arbitrar and violative of Articies 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and direct the Respondents No.2 agency to address a letter to the Immigration execute the LOC issued against the of Samalkot P.S. of Kakinada police station to enable the and pursue his legal to 4 being originating Authorities immediate effect not to Petitioner in relation to Crime No. 83 of 2023 District on the file of the 4“^ Respondent petitioner to travel to India to attend his duties remedies. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI ROSEDAR S.R.A Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: GP FOR Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI PASALA PONNA RAO, DEPUTY HOME SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010160622025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) ■ L1 r.-m [3331] WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 8449/2025 Between: 1.KORRAPATI CHANDRA SEKHAR, S/0. LATE KORRAPATI KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED 31 YEARS, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF ARUN APARTMENTS, FLAT NO306, RED HILLS, HYDERABAD-500004, STATE OF TELANGANA, INDIA PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 12 TREEBLE CT, GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA 27406, U.S.A. 2.REPRESENTED BY HIS GENERAL POWER ATTORNEY (GPA), GANGAVARAPU RAMBABU SON OF G. KOTESWARA RAO, AGED 62 YEARS RESIDENT OF 14-21, JHANSI ARCADE, ILIRD FLOOR, MAIN ROAD, PORANKI RURAL, PENAMALURU MANDAL, KRISHNA DIST. - 521 137, STATE OF A.P. AADHAAR NO. 2262 4188 1681 ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2.THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KAKINADA, DISTRICT, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH. 3.THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE. KAKINADA RURAL KAKINADA DISTRICT, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH. KAKINADA 4.THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, SAMALKOT, DISTRICT, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH. KAKINADA 5.THE UNION OF INDIA, BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER IMMIGRATION Page 2 of 8 SRS,J W.P.No.8449 of 2025 EAST BLOCK VIII LEVEL V SECTOR IRK PURAM NEW DELHI ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or direction declaring the action of the Respondents No.2 to 4 being originating agency in issuing a Look-out Circular notifying the Petitioners name in the Airports in relation to Crime No. 83 of 2023 of Samalkot P.S. of Kakinada District on the file of the 4TH Respondent as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to withdraw the said LOC against the Petitioner in relation to Crime No. 83 of 2023 of Samalkot P.S. of Kakinada District on the file of the 4TH Respondent police station to enable the petitioner to travel to India in connection with his duties of his employment and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2025 issued Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation execution of Look-out Circular notifying the Petitioners name in the Airports in relation to Crime No. 83 of 2023 of Samalkot P.S. of Kakinada District on the file of the 4TH Respondent pending disposal of this petition as illegal, arbitrar and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and direct the Respondents No.2 to 4 being originating agency to address a letter to the Immigration Authorities immediate effect not to execute the LOC issued against the Petitioner in relation to Crime No. 83 of 2023 of Samalkot P.S. of Kakinada District on the file of the 4TH Respondent police station to enable the petitioner to travel to India to attend his duties and pursue his legal remedies and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.ROSEDAR S.R.A Counsel for the Respondent(S); 1.GP FOR HOME Page 3 of 8 SRS,J W.P.No.8449 of 2025 The Court made the following: :: ORDER :: The above writ petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents 2 to 4 in issuing Look-out Circular against the petitioner in Cr.No.83 of 2023 of Samalkot P.S, is illegal and arbitrary. Heard learned counsel appearing on either side. The Station House Officer - respondent No.4, registered a case in Cr.No.83 of 2023 on 01.03.2023, against the petitioner and others for the offence punishable under Section 498-A r/w 34 of IPC and Section 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, wherein the petitioner was arrayed as accused No.3. In the affidavit, it was pleaded that after registration of the aforementioned the petitioner came down to India on 24.05.2023 and appeared before respondents 3 and 4 on the same day itself and completed the process under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C and cooperated with the police. It was further pleaded that the petitioner, along with his brother and mother, attended counselling held by the police and elders on both sides from 25.05.2023 to 30.05.2023. The petitioner and family members appointed an Advocate and submitted necessary documents in connection with Section 41-A Cr.P.C notice. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that since the petitioner cooperated with the investigation, issuing a Look-out Circular against the petitioner is not only illegal but also violative of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. " 2. 3. crime. 5. Sri Ajay, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, submitted instructions of Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Peddapuram and would submit that a notice under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C was issued against A4 to A7 on 04.04.2023 and A8 to A10 on 02.05.2023, and the investigation is pending. SRS,J W.P.No.8449 of 2025 Notices under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C were not served on the petitioner, A1 & No.7 of the instructions, it was stated as follows A2. In para further submit that we are ready to withdraw the lookout notice to A-1 and petitioner if they come to “It is notice after seeking 41(A) India and cooperate with the investigation. from the averments made in the affidavit and the material specifically pleaded that Section 41-A of Cr.P.C 24.05.2023. The petitioner, along with 24.05.2023. It was further Thus, as seen available on record, it was 6. notice was served on the petitioner on attended before the respondents 3 & 4 on affidavit that the petitioner cooperated with the A2 & A3 averred in para No.9 of the police whenever they calls from the contacted through WhatsApp messages and over phone official cell phone Nos.9440796508 & 7013004400 Circular (LOC) has not been defined anywhere legally. In -I W.P.(Crl.)no.1315 of Court of Delhi held that LOC can be cognizable offences under IPC or other penal 7. The Look Out N Sumer Singh Saikan v. Assistant Director’s case in 2008 and Crl.Ref.No.1 of 2006, High taken by investigating agency 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 likelihood of accused ieaving the country to evade trial/arrest and only in those LOC can be opened as against the accused therein. It is trite of LOC by the police only in drastic in circumstances, that recourse can contingencies. be had for the issue learned single judge of W.P.No.12687 of 2022, dated 02.05.2022 a this Court held as hereunder; In 8. be had for (2015) 3 where the POINT: ....It is trite that the recourse can alt 15 issue of LOC only in extreme cases investigating agency establishes that the accused in cognizable deliberately evaded arrest or not appeared despite ■> , cases SRS.J '^■P.No.8449 of 2025 fssa/ng of NBW there Country and other coercive measures and also M/as that every likelihood of accused absconding from the as to not to concerned Criminal submit to the jurisdiction of the Court and thereby to proceedings. In Sumer evade arrest / trial Singh Salkan’s case petitioners the High Court aspect as to and other criminal cited by the learned of Delhi counsel for the above recourse to the LOC reiterated the circumstance under what can be taken. 8. Be that it concerned, admittedly issuing of LOC si may, the present case is the stage of i are not at already issued since it M/as pending against the and petitioners. However IS whether the LOC ‘=°'’‘'"ced against the petitioners by the police, the police laid this Court what is be allowed consideration I germane for to be «hen in the Charge-Sheet filed to them. To they gave dean chit charge-sheet and confirm whether ^^onerated petitioners (Judicial) called through Registrar or not, for relevant Magistrate of / Class information from the Court of Judicial Trial of Prohibition r Court, Nellore. Learned for <5 Excise Offices-cum-FAC JMFC Mobiie the Sub-Inspector 29.04.2022 in Crime No. 231/2021 stating that h of Police, Disha Police : against accused Nos. 1 to 3 mentioning that he Nos. 4 and 5 i. Station, Nellore oharge-sheet while laid on 6 24.09.2021 involvement of found no h accused ond thereby not charge- magistrate further intimated that the ® ' Petitioners herein Learned sheeted them, charge-sheet 02.03.2022 came up for consideration before him and on perusal on of the record he found prima f^niFb ^^<>-^edNos.Uo3bu,found case against the material against the and hence he i. her no incriminating' charge-sheet complainant directing on 25.04.2022 for accused Nos. 4 ond 5 in the issued notice to de facto appearance before objections if the Court any. Accordingly de facto filing appeared complainant 1 SRS,J W.P.No.8449 of 2025 25.04.2022 and sought time for filing before the Court on protest petition and hence learned magistrate extended the time till 03.06.2022.” the LOC, the personal liberty of the person is curtailed, the circular instructions that have been issued by the that he will cooperate with By originating The LOCs are only 9. pondent/police to detain a person or to ensure the trial. Of late, in each case, that has been registered under Section 498-A comfffS'ri for.the respondent/police without looking into the res IPC, it has become aspects whether the petitioner is cooperating with the trial or he is evading originating the LOCs. It is essential that the arrest, in mechanical manner are police have to open LOCs against the persons who are accused of grave who are involved in financial irregularities or the offences, or the persons offences which are against Society. In such cases, the respondent/police can resort to opening the LOCs against the accused by not permitting them to leave the country. If the accusation against the accused persons is such that it detrimental to the Nation, then LOC can be issued IS In the case at hand, the crime was registered against the petitioner 498-A r/w 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the 10. and others under Section Dowry Prohibition Act. The offences are not so grave. By originating LOC, the personal liberty of the petitioner would be affected. On a 498-A of r/w 34 of IPC and 3 and 4 of the mere registration of FIR for the offences under Section Dowry Prohibition Act, if the against the accused, it will affect the personal liberty of the petitioner, in most it will take much time for the case to respondent police conclude to open the LOC cases, it may end in compromise come up for hearing. The personal liberty of the petitioner cannot be curtailed, in the facts of the crime registered against the petitioner, since the petitioner or cooperated the investigation. Page 7 of 8 SRS,J W.P.No.8449 of 2025 Given the discussion supra, coupled with the expressions in the aforementioned orders and, in the facts and circumstances of the case, originating and continuing LOG against the petitioner herein is an abuse of process and hence is quashed. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ^ 11. 12. Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Kakinada, Kakinada District, State of Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kakinada Rural, Kakinada District, State of Andhra Pradesh. 4. The Station House Officer, Samalkot, Kakinada District, State of Andhra Pradesh. 5. The Commissioner Immigration, Bureau of immigration Ministry of Home Affairs, Union of India, East Block Vlll Level V Sector IRK Puram New Delhi 6. One CC to Sri Rosedar S.R.A, Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to Sri Pasala Ponna Rao, Deputy Solicitor General of India, High Court of A.P.[OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 9. Three CD Copies. ssb HIGH COURT DATED;02/04/2025 ORDER WP.No.8449 of 2025 OI MAY 2025 J) ^ ^ Current Section f=c: ALLOWING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS