JUDGMENT

G.S. Sandhawalia, J.

Petitioner in the present writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeks writ for directing respondent Nos.1 & 2 to produce the Look Out Circulars issued against him and to quash the same so that he can travel abroad. Resultantly, directions are also sought to expunge the entry made on the passport of the petitioner (Annexure P-13) wherein it has been stamped as "Cancelled Without Prejudice" on 15.03.2023.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that inter se parties judgment has already been pronounced in his favour on 12.12.2022 (Annexure P-6) and therefore respondent Nos.1 & 2 were not justified in preventing him from travelling abroad on 15.03.2023 when he had sought to go to United States of America.

3. Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2, Mr.Jain submits that on an earlier occasion, there was a direction that petitioner be permitted to travel abroad for 2 months and therefore, as per the directions of this Court, he was not permitted to travel abroad for the second time as even the earlier travel was subject to the condition of depositing an FDR of Rs.10 lakhs with the Registrar General of this Court which FDR was to be valid for a period of one year.

4. It is to be noticed that on an earlier occasion, in CWP-25686- 2022, it was noticed that the petitioner has a Permanent Residency Certificate of the USA and also has a business. The petitioner had appended his Permanent Residency Certificate which is also attached herein (Annexure P-4) as a matter of proof. It is in such circumstances, while noticing that he has a trucking business in USA registered under the name of M/s Lionson Trucking Inc., Modesto, California and the fact that he had visited several countries and has never been prevented from travelling abroad, the writ petition had been allowed while noticing that he had been stopped on 23.10.2022 when he was travelling to USA. It was noticed that it was on account of an outstanding loan which was secured with a mortgage of 87 kanals of land valued at Rs.4.02 crores as per the sanction letter dated 09.09.2013 and action had been initiated before the DRT-III, Chandigarh to recover the dues of Rs.1.23 crores. Resultantly, while placing reliance upon the judgments of the Apex Court in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) 1 SCC 248 and Satish Chandra Verma v. Union of India 2019 SCC Online SC 2048 , the writ petition had been allowed with the following observations:

"The loan sanctioned to petitioner is secured with a mortgage of 87 Kanals valued at Rs.4.02 Cr as per loan sanction letter dt.9.9.2013, and since the same would adequately cover the loan liability of the Bank, and it had initiated action before the DRT-III, Chandigarh to recover dues of Rs.1.23 Cr from petitioner, it's objections to petitioner's travel abroad are not sustainable.

However in view of declaration of loan account as fraud and declaration of petitioner as a "willful defaulter" and filing of a police complaint, though after filing of the Writ Petition, subject to certain conditions, he can be permitted to travel abroad.

Accordingly the Writ Petition is allowed; subject to the petitioner depositing an FDR/TDR for Rs.10 lakhs taken from a nationalized Bank and valid for one year with the Registrar General of this Court within 2 weeks, the LOC issued against the petitioner at the instance of respondent No.3 by respondent No.2 is set aside, and the petitioner is permitted to travel abroad for 2 months from the date of his departure from India; the stamp/endorsement "Cancelled" put on his passport is quashed; respondents No.1 & 2 shall expunge any remarks/endorsement/ entry that might have been made in