Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SANJEEV NARULA
Atul Punj – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJEEV NARULA, J.
1. The Petitioner, formerly a Promoter and Director of Punj Lloyd Limited [“PLL”] impugns the Look Out Circular [“LOC”] issued against him at the behest of the Department of Revenue (Respondent No. 1) and the Serious Fraud Investigation Office [“SFIO”] (Respondent No. 2). The LOC, which restricts his international travel, was initially impugned to enable a trip to the United Kingdom from 14th August, 2024 to 30th August, 2024 for business purposes. During the course of proceedings, the Petitioner, through additional affidavits, modified his request to travel from 5th December, 2024 to 20th December, 2024. Although this period too has elapsed, the Petitioner persists in seeking suspension of the LOC, emphasizing the ongoing relevance of his business commitments and asserting that the meetings can be rescheduled if relief is granted, by this Court.
2. The present case necessitates a careful examination of the competing interests at play the Petitioner’s fundamental right to travel abroad and the State’s imperative to ensure that ongoing investigations into serious allegations of financial impropriety are not thwarted. While the Petitioner asserts that his l
The right to travel abroad is protected under Article 21, and restrictions must be justified by credible evidence of flight risk or obstruction of justice.
The court emphasized the authority of the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) and the necessity of the Petitioner's presence for effective investigation into the affairs of Gitanjali Gems Limit....
The issuance and continuation of a Look-Out Circular must be justified by compelling reasons, specifically regarding flight risk or evading justice; lack of fresh evidence can render it arbitrary.
The seriousness of economic offences and the principles guiding the issuance of Look Out Circulars were central to the court's decision.
Issuance of Look Out Circulars must be based on concrete evidence and cannot be justified solely by the default in loan repayment, as it violates fundamental rights without due process.
Look Out Circulars must be justified by substantial evidence and cannot infringe on fundamental rights without clear, objective criteria.
The court emphasized the importance of considering the economic interest and public funds at stake in cases involving LOCs, and the duty of individuals in positions of responsibility within companies....
Point of Law : Travel restriction on accused - Recourse to issuance of LOC is to be taken in cognizable offences under the IPC or other penal laws. It is also specified therein that in cases where th....
The issuance of a LOC must be based on exceptional circumstances and supported by substantial evidence. Mere suspicion is not sufficient to curtail an individual's right to travel abroad.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the issuance of Look Out Circular (LOC) should be based on cognizable offences, and the guidelines for issuance of LOC should be followed. The....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
