Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(AP) 414
APHC010244312024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3331]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 12163/2024 Between:
1. K ORRAPATI PRASAD, S/O KORRAPATI RAMALINGAIAH, AGED 48 YEARS, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT D.NO.2-597A, RAMASHANKARAIAH COLONY, GORANTIA, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND
1. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI.
2. U NION OF INDIA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, SOUTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI.
3. T HE IMMIGRATION OFFICER, , UNION OF INDIA, RAJIV GANDHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, HYDERABAD.
4. T HE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, , MAHILA POLICE STATION, ANANTHAPURAMU, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to Issue an appropriate writ particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the 4th respondent in revoking the Look out notice issued in-pursuance of Crime No 12 of 2015 dated 12.10.2015 registered under section 498A, 420 R/w 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1890 confront of issuance of the 41A notice dated 19.02.2024 and communicating the same to the appropriate authorities and the consequential action of the respondent dated 25.05.2024 in cancelling my departure as illegal, arbitrary and capricious besides being violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and principles of natural justice, consequently quash and set aside the lookout notice issued by the 4th respondent herein, and direct the respondent No 3 to permit me to depart and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to suspend the Lookout notice issued by the 4th respondent herein in-pursuance of Crime No: 12 of 2015 dated 12.10.2015 registered under section 498A, 420 R/w 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1890 and direct the 3rd respondent to permit my imigration pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass such IA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to implead the proposed respondent as respondent no.5 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. KARUMANCHI INDRANEEL BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following:
ORDER
Heard Sri Karumanchi Indraneel Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Home, appearing for the respondent Nos.1 and 4.
2. The Writ Petition is filed to declare the inaction of 4th respondent in revoking the Lookout notice issued in-pursuance of Crime No.24 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 420 r/w 34 of I.P.C as illegal and arbitrary. Initially the aforementioned crime was registered at Mahila Police Station and later it was transferred to I Town Police Station, Ananthapur.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that police registered a case in Crime No.24 of 2015, on 12.10.2015 against the petitioner and others for the offences under Sections 498-A and 420 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code. He also would submit that pursuant to the registration of the Crime, lookout circular was issued. In view of the said circular, petitioner is not able to go to abroad.
4. Learned Government Pleader for Home would submit that in view of the lookout circular issued against him, the petitioner has to approach before the concerned Judicial Magistrate of First Class and make proper application.
5. Heard, perused the record.
6. Whenever a look out notice is issued the person against whom the Lookout notice issued shall approach the jurisdictional magistrate and file appropriate application. In a decision reported in Dasari Sudheer vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, the learned Single Judge of composite High Court observed as follows:-
“It is also held that the criminal Court's jurisdiction in cancellation of LOC or upholding the same is within similar jurisdiction as to cancellation of NBW and as such, the said Criminal Court is fully competent to pass appropriate orders taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case. Here, the decision of the Delhi High Court in Sumer Singh Salkan, Court On Its Own Motion Re v. Assistant Director and others; State v. Gurnek Singh' Etc. (2) 2010 Law Suit (Delhi) 1628 dated 11.08.2010 also considers the matter in a similar manner and para 11 also reiterate that it is open for the petitioner to approach the Officer who ordered issuance of LOC or it is open for him to approach the trial Court which can rescind the LOC issued on an appropriate application made by the person concerned. I respectfully agree with the aforesaid decisions. Since no purpose would be served by directing the petitioner to approach the Superintendent of Police for the purpose of withdrawal of LOC, this writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to move the Court of Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Prohibition & Excise, Guntur, where C.C. No. 570 of 2014 is pending and to make appropriate application seeking withdrawal of LOC. The petitioner is also at liberty to set out the reasons for making the said request including that he has already surrendered and has been abiding with the directions issued from time to time by the Court. If such an application is made by the petitioner, the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class shall consider the same in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders expeditiously. No order as to costs. The miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
7. In view of the aforementioned ratio, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission with the consent of both the counsels, giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned Judicial Magistrate and make appropriate application. If any application is filed, the learned Judicial Magistrate shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders within one (1)
week strictly in accordance with law.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand dismissed.
_____________________________
JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 30.05.2024 CVD
