The main legal point established is that the issuance of Look Out Circular (LOC) should be based on exceptional circumstances, and the right to travel is a valuable fundamental right that should be curtailed only in such exceptional cases.

JUDGMENT

Rajnish Bhatnagar, J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India r/w Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking withdrawal or deletion of the Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against the Petitioner.

2. In brief the facts of the case are that the complainant, namely, Param Preet Singh alleged that one Harinder Singh in conspiracy with Sandeep Singh Deswal (petitioner herein), Sunil Kumar Dahiya and Sanjay Kumar Dahiya (both directors of the accused company M/s V Corp Developers Pvt. Ltd.), induced him to sell his immovable property bearing No.T-28/2, DLF-3, Gurgaon, Haryana under the condition that the sale amount will have to be invested back in M/s V Corp Developers Pvt. Ltd. which was developing a project namely, Manhattan Business Suits at Sector 74/35, Gurgaon, Haryana with the assurance of a handsome return on investment.

3. It is further alleged that an Agreement to sell dated 14.04.2014 was executed between the complainant Param Preet Singh, M/s V Corp Developers Pvt. Ltd. and Santosh Rani Dhariwal w/o Sandeep Singh Deswal (petitioner) for total consideration of Rs. 7 crores. A total sum of Rs. 4.80 crores was received against the consideration of aforesaid property in the bank account of complainant Param Preet Singh from the bank account of the petitioner. The said amount was further transferred to M/s V Corp Developers Pvt. Ltd, which allotted units to the complainant in aforesaid project. M/s V Corp Developers Pvt. Ltd. further transferred Rs.4.80 crores to the bank account of the petitioner. However, remaining Rs. 1.90 Crores was not paid to the complainant by the accused persons. It is also alleged by another complainant, namely, Tejpal Sharma that all the accused persons cheated him to the tune of Rs.1,55,00,000/- and made similar allegations.

4. During investigation, accused Sunil Dahiya and Sanjay Dahiya, who were in judicial custody in another case were formally arrested. The petitioner, namely, Sandeep Singh Deswal did not join the investigation despite several notices issued to him and hence, Look Out Circular (LOC) against the petitioner was opened in the year 2019.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned ASC for the State and perused the status reports filed by the State.

6. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner seeks withdrawal/deletion of the Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against the petitioner as he has been falsely implicated by the complainant and he was never given any notice by respondent on proposal of opening of LOC against him and was also not informed of the reasons for opening of the said LOC. He further submitted that the petitioner was on no occasion asked to join investigation by way of issuance of warrants and even after filing of the chargesheet, the petitioner has neither been apprehended in the present case till date nor has been summoned by the learned Trial Court. He submitted that the petitioner has travelled abroad on eleven occasions during pendency of complaint against him and also after registration of FIR and on all the occasions he came back, joined and cooperated in the investigation as per directions of the investigating officer, therefore, there is no possibility of the petitioner not returning to India after his travels to USA. He further submitted that the petitioner was a green card holder of USA and he had voluntarily surrendered his green card and now, he is travelling on a tourist visa. He submitted that the LOC has seriously impinged on his travel to meet his children and family who live in the USA. He further submitted that the respondent's bald plea that there is an apprehension that the petitioner would misuse the liberty and may not come back to face the proceedings cannot be accepted when in fact, the petitioner has duly joined and cooperated in the investigation. Lastly, it is submitted by Ld. counsel for the petitioner that it is an admitted position