APHC010437202025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] WEDNESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 22682/2025 Between: 1. RAMPILLA SUKHDEV, S/O. VENKATESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, EMPLOYEE, D.NO.76-13-91/43, LALITHA TRIPURA NILAYAM, JOJI NAGAR, BHAVANI PURAM, VIJAYAWADA CITY NTR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, SOUTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110 001. 2. BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER (IMMIGRATION) EAST BLOCK - VIII. LEVAL - V. SECTOR, 1. R.K. PURAM. NEW DELHI -110 066. 3. BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, , MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS JOINT DIRECTOR (IMMIGRATION) 4. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, DGP OFFICE, 6 BN. A.P.S.P., MANGALAGIRI TOWN GUNTUR DISTRICT. 5. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, NTR POLICE COMMISSIONERATE. AT VIJAYAWADA 6. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, BHAVANIPURAM POLICE STATION VIJAYAWADA CITY, NTR DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. B.SUDHAKAR KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. The Court made the following: JS,J W.P.No.22682 of 2025 2 ORDER: This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner seeking the following relief: “………to issue a direction or Order more like Writ of Mandamus declaring the Look-Out Circular ((LOC) issued against Petitioner by the Respondents 1 to 3 at the instance of Respondents 4 to 6 in CC No.2333 of 2025 on the file of the IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada in Crime 676 of 2024 of Bhavanipuram Police Station, Vijayawada City, NTR District, Andhra Pradesh registered under Section 85 of BNS Act and Sec. 3 and 4 of D.P. Act. as arbitrary, illegal, ultra vires, and Unconstitutional and to consequently set aside the same….” 2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K. Sreedhar Murthy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3, and perused the material available on record. 3. The petitioner is a passport holder and is currently employed as an IT Consultant at Manikanta Solutions Limited in London, England. On 27.05.2025, the petitioner came to India on official work. The Delhi Airport Authorities detained the petitioner and released him after obtaining confirmation from the 6th respondent. JS,J W.P.No.22682 of 2025 3 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner’s brother’s wife has lodged a complaint vide Crime No.676 of 2024, which was numbered as C.C.No.2333 of 2025 on the file of the IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada, and respondent No.6 has also filed an absconding charge sheet against the petitioner. The learned Magistrate recalled the NBWs pending against the petitioner on 13.08.2025. He further submits that the petitioner has returned to India to attend his employment and needs to move back to his workplace. If the lookout notice issued by the respondents is not considered or quashed, the petitioner will face the risk of losing his job. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is ready to appear before the Court whenever his presence is required and prays for the quashing of the Look Out Circular issued against him. To support his submission, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the order dated 09.10.2023, passed by this Court in W.P. No.16136 of 2023, wherein this Court held as follows: “6. The Look Out Circular (LOC) has not been defined anywhere legally. In Sumer Singh Saikan Vs. Assistant Director’s case in W.P. (Crl.) No.1315 of 2008 and JS,J W.P.No.22682 of 2025 4 Crl.Ref.No.1 of 2006, High Court of Delhi held that LOC 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 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. It is not that the accused is not cooperating with the trial or is evading arrest. In W.P. No.12687 of 2022, dated 02.05.2022, this Court held as hereunder: “POINT: I gave my anxious consideration to the above respective submissions. It is trite that the recourse can be had for 1 2015 SCC OnLine Hyd 816 = (2015) 3 ALT 1 5 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 Saikan’s case cited by the learned counsel for the petitioners the High Court of Delhi reiterated the above JS,J W.P.No.22682 of 2025 5 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 Offences-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 charge-sheet against accused Nos.1 to 3 on 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 on 02.03.2022 and on perusal of the record he found prima 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 and hence he JS,J W.P.No.22682 of 2025 6 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.” 7. By virtue of opening the LOC, the personal liberty of the person is curtailed. The LOCs are only the circular instructions that have been issued by the respondent/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 common that the respondent/police, without looking into the aspects whether the petitioner is 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 are against the Society. In such cases, the respondent/police can resort in opening the LOCs against the accused in not permitting them to leave the country. If the accusation against the accused persons is such that it is detrimental to the Nation, then LOC can be issued.” 6. In similar circumstances, this Court in W.P. No.325 of 2025, dated 22.01.2025, allowed the Writ Petition by quashing the LOC issued against the petitioner therein. JS,J W.P.No.22682 of 2025 7 7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the law laid down by this Court, in the aforesaid Writ Petitions, the Writ Petition is allowed, and the Look Out Circular issued against the petitioner is hereby quashed. However, it is open for the petitioner to approach the competent Court and file an appropriate application in case the petitioner intends to travel abroad. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date: 10.09.2025 Ivd JS,J W.P.No.22682 of 2025 8 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION No.22682 of 2025 Dated: 10.09.2025 Ivd