2019 (5) TMI 2009 - HC - Indian Laws

Challenge to Look Out Circular - It is alleged that the petitioner had exerted personal influence over other bank officials to grant facilities to undeserving borrowers, thereby causing wrongful loss to the banks and wrongful gain to the persons accused - HELD THAT - This Court is, prima facie, of the view that the submission made by the IO was only for the purpose of opposing the petitioner s application and there was no urgent requirement for the petitioner to be confined in this country. This is obvious from that fact that the investigating agency has not interacted with the petitioner during the past over seven months. Even after being restrained from leaving the country and returning home, for over a year, the petitioner is not an accused in any of the cases. As notice above, no charge sheet has been filed by the CBI. The instrument of a LOC is only to be used in an urgent situation where a person is found to have been evading the process of investigation. The investigating agency must circumspect in using this instrument, as it seriously affects the fundamental rights of the citizen, who is restrained from travelling. In the facts of this case, more so as the petitioner has taken up residence in the UK and he has been restrained from joining his wife and son who continue to reside in the UK. This Court is of the view that the petitioner cannot be stopped from leaving this country by using the instrument of an LOC - the petitioner is permitted to travel overseas for a period of five weeks, subject to meeting the conditions imposed - petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Impugning Look Out Circular issued against petitioner by CBI, Allegations of involvement in criminal cases, Exerting influence over bank officials, Request for cancellation of Look Out Circular, Denial of permission to travel overseas, Urgency of petitioner's travel to the UK, Conditions imposed for petitioner to travel overseas, Disposal of petition and pending application.

Impugning Look Out Circular:
The petitioner challenged the Look Out Circular issued against him by the CBI, contending that he was not an accused in any case, no charge sheet had been filed, and he had voluntarily appeared for examination. The High Court observed that the purpose of the Look Out Circular is to prevent evasion of investigation, and in this case, the petitioner had not evaded the process. The Court held that the petitioner could not be restrained from leaving the country based on the LOC.

Allegations of Involvement in Criminal Cases:
The counter affidavit alleged the petitioner's involvement in two criminal cases related to exerting personal influence over bank officials for wrongful gain. Despite no charge sheet being filed, the respondents contended that the petitioner might abscond. The Court noted the lack of urgency in confining the petitioner, as no interaction had occurred for over seven months, and the petitioner was not an accused in any case.

Exerting Influence Over Bank Officials:
It was alleged that the petitioner exerted personal influence over bank officials to grant facilities to undeserving borrowers, causing wrongful loss to banks. However, the petitioner denied the allegations and stated his willingness to cooperate with the investigating authorities.

Request for Cancellation of Look Out Circular:
The petitioner made representations to the CBI for the cancellation of the Look Out Circular, which were rejected. Subsequently, he filed an application seeking permission to travel overseas, which was denied by the Special Judge, citing the petitioner as a suspect required for further interaction.

Urgency of Petitioner's Travel to the UK:
The petitioner sought urgent travel to the UK due to his expiring visa, committing to return within five weeks and cooperate with the investigating agency upon his return. The High Court permitted his travel subject to specified conditions, including depositing a Fixed Deposit Receipt as security and providing a surety bond.

Disposal of Petition and Pending Application:
The High Court disposed of the petition, allowing the petitioner to travel overseas for five weeks upon meeting the imposed conditions. The Court clarified that the contentions regarding the issuance of the Look Out Circular were reserved, and the Registrar General would handle the security deposit and surety bond, releasing them upon the petitioner's return and compliance with the conditions.