The right to travel abroad is a fundamental aspect of personal liberty and must not be arbitrarily restricted; any restrictions must be justified by credible evidence.

JUDGMENT :

SAURABH BANERJEE, J.

1. The present writ petition has been received on transfer on an urgent mentioning.

2. The petitioner, vide the present writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeks the following reliefs:

“A. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Certiorari and/or Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ/Order/Direction suspending the Look-Out Circular(s), if any, issued against the Petitioner (bearing passport No. Z4270314) by the Respondent No. 3 at the instance of Respondent No. 1 and 2 and permitting the Petitioner to travel to Lisbon (Portugal) and Spain via Dubai, UAE between 25.08.2025 to 16.09.2025 on such terms and conditions this Hon’ble Court deems fit; AND/OR

B. Issue a writ of certiorari/mandamus or any other writ/ order/ direction in the nature thereof directing the Respondents and its officers to not restrict the Petitioner (bearing Passport No. Z4270314) from travelling to Lisbon (Portugal) and Spain via Dubai, UAE for any reasons whatsoever; AND/OR C. Pass any other/further order(s) or direction(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and necessary in the interest of justice.”

3. Succinctly put, the petitioner seeks suspension of the Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against the petitioner by the respondents and further seeks permission to travel to Lisbon (Portugal) and Spain via Dubai, UAE between 25.08.2025 to 16.09.2025.

4. At the outset, learned senior counsel for the petitioner drawing the attention of this Court to the Medical Report dated 17.06.2025 issued by the Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET-CT, Max Super Speciality Hospital, Saket (East Block), New Delhi-110 017 (Max Healthcare) [Annexure 1], submits that there is an emergent need for the petitioner to have filed the present writ petition for seeking appropriate reliefs for travelling abroad. The relevant extract of the said Medical Report dated 17.06.2025 issued by the Max Healthcare is reproduced as under:-

“... ...Brief clinical history: Patient was incidentally detected to have increased S.PSA. MRI prostate suggestive of PIRADS-4 lesions in peripheral and transition zones. S.PSA-11 ng/ml. Current PET-CT is being done for disease status evaluation.

Non PSMA avid, exophytic hypodense lesion with areas of fat attenuation is noted in lower pole of right kidney, measuring~2.8 x 2.4 x 2.6 (cc) cm-? angiomyolipoma.

Prostate gland measures ~4.2 x 5.2 x 4.9 (cc) cm. Low grade heterogeneous PSMA uptake (SUV max: 2.9) is noted in central and transition zones of the prostate gland. A subcentimeter sized focal enhancing nodule with no significant PSMA uptake is seen in right posterior peripheral zone of the mid gland. Bilateral seminal vesicles appear unremarkable. ... ...”

5. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner then submits that though the petitioner is involved in different proceedings, which are still pending, however, this Court, in an earlier writ petition being W.P.(C) 9372/2024 filed by him, vide order dated 07.01.2025, permitted suspension of the LOC issued against the petitioner by the respondents to allow the petitioner to travel to the United Kingdom for a period of 15 days i.e. from 01.02.2025 to 15.02.2025 as also granted liberty to approach the Court, should the circumstances warrant, subject to certain conditions imposed therein. The relevant extracts of the aforesaid order dated 07.01.2025 is reproduced herein as under:

“... ...13. The principle of res judicata, enshrined in Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, precludes a Court from adjudicating an issue that has been directly and substantially decide