JUDGEMENT

1. The Petitioner seeks to challenge the Look Out Circular which has been issued against him by Respondent No.1/ Bureau of Immigration at the instance of EOW Mumbai.

2. Material on record reveals that a complaint was received by the Economic Offences Wing, Unit- VI, Mumbai, from the authorized representative of the companies, namely, Suraksha Realty Limited and Topsoil Developers Private Limited.

3. It is stated in the complaint that DSR Infotech Limited through its Directors, Rahul Shah, Trupti Milind Pandit and Akhand Pratap Singh availed a loan of Rs. 10 crores from Suraksha Realty Limited towards Optionally Fully Convertible Debentures (OFCD). It is stated that even after more than five years, DSR Infotech India Limited did not return the Optionally Fully Convertible Debentures worth Rs. 15 crores, resulting in breach of the terms and conditions of the OFCDs.

4. It is stated that Suraksha Realty Limited initially invested Rs.15 crores and on 30.10.2015, an additional funding of Rs. 45 lakhs was made through RTGS into DSR Infotech Limited totalling the amount to Rs.15.45 crores. It is stated that apart from Suraksha Realty Limited, another group company of the Suraksha Realty Limited, namely, Topsoil Developers Private Limited was made part of the OFCDs which invested a sum of Rs.1 crore into DSR Infotech Limited. The allegation is that the total amount of Rs.16.45 crores has been misused by DSR Infotech Limited and its Directors Rahul Shah, Trupti Milind Pandit and Akhand Pratap Singh.

5. Material on record discloses that summons were issued to the Petitioner on 27.12.2021 in relation to the said complaint and the Petitioner was asked to appear before the Inspector, Economic Offences Wing, Unit- VI (CG4), CP Office Compound, 3rd Floor, New Police Commissioner Office Building, Mumbai. Instead of honouring the said summons, a reply dated 27.04.2022 has been given on behalf of the Petitioner by an Advocate, giving out the details of the transactions. The reply has been given after four months of the summon.

6. The reply to the summons dated 27.12.2021 states that the Petitioner is currently in USA and resides in Evanston area of Northern District of Chicago, State of Illinois and his statement should be recorded through video conferencing as he has no immediate travel plans to India.

7. Material on record reveals that a subsequent summon dated 28.06.2022 was issued to the Petitioner asking the Petitioner to attend the EOW office on 05.07.2022 at 12:00 hrs. The said summons were not replied to by the Petitioner. Material on record further discloses that on 22.06.2023, a third summons was issued to the Petitioner asking him to be present within seven days from the receipt of the letter which was not been complied with by the Petitioner.

8. Material on record disclose that on the basis of the said complaint, an FIR bearing FIR No.393/2023 dated 12.09.2023 has been registered against the Petitioner at Police Station Matunga, Brihanmumbai, Maharashtra for offences under Section 420, 406 and 34 IPC.

9. The Petitioner finally arrived in India, Delhi on 08.10.2023. The Petitioner had booked his return tickets for 11.10.2023. After his arrival in India, it is to be noted that a further summon was issued against the Petitioner on 10.10.2023, requiring the Petitioner's presence on 16.10.2023.

10. Material on record also discloses that on his arrival to India and on coming to know that an FIR has been registered against him, the Petitioner appeared before the concerned officer on 11.10.2023 and the Petitioner was informed that a Look Out Circular dated 10.10.2023 has also been opened against him. The Petitioner was informed that the said LOC has been opened against the Petitioner pursuant to the registration of the FIR being FIR No.393/2023 dated 12.09.2023 registered at Police Station Matunga, Brihanmumbai, Maharashtra for offences under Section 420, 406 and 34 IPC.

11. A fifth summon was issued on 23.10.2023 and