Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 18428
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Hon`ble Mr Justice S.M. SUBRAMANIAM
VELLACHI V ARUNACHALAM – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
The court reinforced the principle that ongoing investigations take precedence over individual travel requests when legal remedies are still pending.
Headnote:
Quash - Writ Petitioner - Criminal Procedure Code - Sections Relating to Travel and Look Out Circulars - The court denied the writ petition to quash a Look Out Circular due to an ongoing criminal case, emphasizing the potential hindrance to the investigation.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to quash a Look Out Circular issued against her due to an ongoing criminal case for bank fraud. A request to travel abroad was previously denied by the jurisdictional Criminal Court, and a revision petition was pending before the High Court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that allowing the petitioner to travel abroad could jeopardize the ongoing investigation. The decision of the jurisdictional Criminal Court to dismiss the petition was upheld, as the High Court petition was also pending.
Issues: Whether the Look Out Circular should be quashed while another legal remedy was pending regarding permission to travel abroad.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Look Out Circular serves the interest of the investigation, and the petitioner's arguments against the authority of the issuing body were not sufficient to merit quashing the Circular.
Final Decision: Writ Petition dismissed.
O R D E R
The writ has been instituted to quash the Look Out Circular issued by the 1st respondent at the request of 2nd respondent.
2. Admittedly, a criminal case has been registered against the writ petitioner by the Bank Fraud Wing, Team XI, Central Crime Branch, Chennai. A criminal case is pending and final report filed before the jurisdictional Criminal Court of Law. The petitioner filed an application seeking permission to travel abroad before the jurisdictional Criminal Court.
The said petition was dismissed. Hence, he preferred a Crl.R.C.No.76 of 2024 before the High Court of Madras. The said petition is pending and it is informed to this Court that the case was heard and the order reserved.
3. When the petition filed seeking permission to travel abroad is pending on the file of the High Court, the writ petition need not be entertained. More so, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner is a foreign citizen and in the event of allowing her to travel abroad, the investigation into the criminal case will be hampered. The Investigating Agency may not be in a position to secure the presence of the writ petitioner.
4. Considering these aspects, the jurisdictional Criminal Court dismissed the petition. However, the revision petition filed before the High Court is yet to be disposed of.
5. Under these circumstances, if the Look Out Circular is set aside would result in prejudice to the interest of the Investigating Agency prosecuting the petitioner before the Courts in India.
6. That being the factum, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Look Out Circular was issued by the incompetent authority.
8. However, the said ground deserves no merit adjudication, since the petitioner has already approached the jurisdictional Criminal Court and High Court seeking permission to travel abroad and the Criminal Revision Petition filed is yet to be disposed of.
9. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
25.04.2024 Jeni Index : Yes Speaking order / Non-speaking order Neutral Citation : Yes To
1.Union of India, Represented by Ministry of Home Affairs, Foreign Department, Immigration Office, North Block, New Delhi 110 001.
2.The Inspector of Police, Bank Fraud Wing, Team XI, Central Crime Branch, Vepery, Chennai – 600 007.
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Jeni
25.04.2024
