Look-Out Circular Is A Coercive Measure, Has Adverse Consequences: Andhra Pradesh HC Says Authorities Should Apply Mind Before Issuing LOCs
Justice Subba Reddy Satti of the Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that a Look-Out Circular (LOC) is a coercive measure that certainly has adverse civil consequences inasmuch as it makes “a person surrender and consequentially interferes with his right to personal liberty and free movement.”The Court further held that the issuing authority should apply its mind to the facts of each...
Justice Subba Reddy Satti of the Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that a Look-Out Circular (LOC) is a coercive measure that certainly has adverse civil consequences inasmuch as it makes “a person surrender and consequentially interferes with his right to personal liberty and free movement.”
The Court further held that the issuing authority should apply its mind to the facts of each case before issuing an LOC.
The ruling came in a case where the Court was dealing with a writ petition that sought to declare the Look-Out Circular issued against the petitioner by respondents 1 to 3 at the instance of 4 to 6 in Crime No.319 of 2024, Airport Police Station, Visakhapatnam, as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
The petitioner, a Manager at Capgemini Australia, had arrived in India for his father-in-law's last rites. He was detained at Visakhapatnam Airport and was subsequently informed about the pending LOC.
Initially, one Smt. Thammineni Jyothsna Rani lodged a complaint against the petitioner, his mother, sister, and another, alleging harassment before the Disha Police Station, Visakhapatnam. A case was registered for offences under Sections 498A, 506, and 323 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. A charge sheet was later filed before the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, of which the petitioner was aware. A notice under Section 41A of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C) was also issued to the petitioner and others, who cooperated during the investigation.
Later, the petitioner filed for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and the marriage was dissolved, with Smt. Tammineni Jyothsna Rani remaining ex parte. The petitioner's counsel submitted that after the dissolution of the marriage by the competent Court, the petitioner married one Smt. U. Swathi on 07.08.2024. Thereafter, Smt. Thammineni Jyothsna Rani filed another complaint before the Airport Police on 10.09.2024. This complaint was registered as Crime No.319 of 2024, dated 17.09.2024, for offences under Sections 85 and 82 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The 5th respondent (Superintendent of Police, Visakhapatnam) issued a Look-Out Circular in connection with the said crime against the petitioner, and the same was forwarded to respondents 1 to 3.
The Court held that the petitioner, residing in Australia at the time of registration, may not have been aware of the LOC. The Police had already served a notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and the petitioner provided sureties and cooperated with the investigation. Given these facts, issuing an LOC was unwarranted. The 5th respondent was, thus, directed to withdraw the LOC issued on 17.09.2024 in Crime No.319 of 2024, Airport Police Station, Visakhapatnam.
The petition was subsequently allowed.
Case Number: WRIT PETITION NO: 4788/2025
Case Title: BAGADI SANTOSH KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA
Date of Judgment: 12.03.2025