Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 17315

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Battu Devanand, J
Paruchuri Naresh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO: 6770/2026

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: B S N Naidu
For the Respondents: Mallampalli Srinivas, GP For Home

An LOC acts as a coercive measure impacting the fundamental right to travel; its issuance and continuation necessitate strict scrutiny, requiring the originating agency to demonstrate necessity and proportionality, and must be recalled if the subject cooperates with the investigation.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Art. 226 - Look Out Circular (LOC) - Legality and proportionality - Right to travel abroad - Restraint must be narrowly confined and proportionate to the object sought to be achieved - Indefinite exclusion constitutes unreasonable restriction on liberty. (Paras 6, 8)

(B) Writ jurisdiction - Scope - Court duty-bound to subject issuance and continuation of LOCs to strict scrutiny - Balancing State interests with individual fundamental rights. (Para 6)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, facing a criminal case under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and the Dowry Prohibition Act, challenged the issuance and maintenance of a Look Out Circular (LOC) that prevented him from travelling abroad for personal/legal reasons.

Findings of Court:
The LOC issued against the petitioner is deemed a significant restraint on the right to travel, which is a facet of the right to life and personal liberty. The state failed to justify the continued necessity of the circular given the petitioner's availability and cooperation.

Issues: Whether the maintenance of an LOC by the state authorities constitutes an illegal and arbitrary restraint on the subject's fundamental right to travel under Art. 21.

Ratio Decidendi: An LOC must be strictly necessary, proportionate, and periodically reviewed. Continued operation of an LOC, despite an individual's cooperation with investigative processes, is an unjustified restriction on personal liberty.

Result: The petition was disposed of with directions for the petitioner to provide an undertaking to appear before authorities, followed by the mandatory recall of the LOC by the originating agency.

Table of Content
1. factual background involving matrimonial allegations and loc registration. (Para 1 , 2)
2. parties' contentions regarding the legitimacy of the loc. (Para 3 , 4)
3. judicial precedents establishing the right to travel as a fundamental liberty. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
4. conditions for recalling loc upon compliance with investigative requirements. (Para 8 , 9)

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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 3 to 5 herein in initiating and maintaining the Look Out Circular Regular LOC No.2026403054 dated 17.01.2026 in FIR No.188/2025 dated 13.11.2025, against the petitioner with the immigration authorities in connection with Crime No. 188 of 2025 on the file of the 4th respondent police station dated 13.11.2025 for the offences punishable under Section 85 of BNS and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, though the crime in FIR No. 188 of 2025 was challenged before this Hon'ble Court and thereby preventing the petitioner at immigration authorities at entries and exit points in India from travelling abroad as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and oppose to all cannons of justice consequentially, suspend the operation of the circular i.e. the Look Out Circular LOC No.2026403054 dated 17.01.2026 initiated by the 5th respondent upon the request of the 4th respondent in FIR No.188/2025 dated 13.11.2025 forthwith and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

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 to suspend the operation of the circular i.e. the Look Out Circular Regular LOC No.2026403054 dated 17.01.2026 initiated by the 5th respondent upon the request of the 4th respondent in FIR No. 188 of 2025 dated 13.11.2025 forthwith, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2026

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 permit the Petitioner to Implead the Proposed Respondents No.6 and 7 as Party Respondents 6 and 7 in W.P.No.6770 of 2026, in the interest of justice and pass

The Court made the following:

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

WRIT PETITION No.6770 of 2026

ORDER: -

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following relief:

“…to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent Nos.6 and 7 herein in initiating and maintaining the Look Out Circular Regular LOC No.2026403054 dated 17.01.2026 in FIR No.188/2025 dated 13.11.2025, against the petitioner with the Immigration Authorities in connection with Crime No.188 of 2025 on the file of the 4th respondent police station dated 13.11.2025 for the offences punishable under Section 85 of BNS and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, through the crime in FIR No.188 of 2025 was challenged before this Hon’ble Court and thereby preventing the petitioner at immigration authorities at entries and exit points in India from travelling abroad as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and oppose to all cannons of justice consequentially, suspend the operation of the circular i.e., the Look Out Circular LOC No.2026403054 dated 17.01.2026 initiated by the 6th respondent upon the request of the 4th respondent in FIR No.188/2025 dated 13.11.2025 forthwith…”

2. The brief facts of the case of the petitioner is that the wife of the petitioner filed a case against him along with family members before the 4th respondent police station with several matrimonial allegations on 13.11.2025. After receipt of the same, the 5th respondent police registered the crime in FIR No

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 17315

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESHBattu Devanand, JParuchuri Naresh – AppellantVersusState Of Andhra Pradesh – RespondentWRIT PETITION NO: 6770/2026

An LOC acts as a coercive measure impacting the fundamental right to travel; its issuance and continuation necessitate strict scrutiny, requiring the originating agency to demonstrate necessity and proportionality, and must be recalled if the subject cooperates with the investigation.

Cases Referred (3)

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Battu Devanand, J
Paruchuri Naresh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO: 6770/2026