IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBODH ABHYANKAR th ON THE 18 OF DECEMBER, 2025 WRIT PETITION No. 45301 of 2025 NITIN KASLIWAL Versus UNION OF INDIA THROUGH CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIG-

ATION Appearance:

Shri Karpe Prakhar Mohan - Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate for the respondent.

ORDER

1] This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:-

“7.1 Issue an appropriate writ to quash the impugned order dated

06/10/2025 passed by Ld. Special Judicial Magistrate, CBI, Indore in Case No.SC CBI 8/2023 (Annexure P-1) and the Lookout Circular issued against the petitioner.

7.2 Issue a writ an appropriate writ directing the Respondents not to obstruct or hinder the Petitioner's right to travel internationally.

7.3 7.3 Pass any other or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

2] The petitioner is aggrieved of the order dated 06/10/2025 passed by the Special Judicial Magistrate, CBI, Indore in Case No.SC CBI 8/2023, whereby the application filed by the petitioner to travel abroad has been rejected on the ground of a Look Out Circular (LOC) being issued by the respondent CBI against the petitioner.

3] In brief, the facts of the case are that the petitioner is facing the aforesaid case under Section 120-B read with Section 420 of IPC and Section 13-2 read with Section 13-1-B of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, which has been registered at Crime No.RC2222021A005 dated 14/07/2021 based on a complaint by Union Bank of India. The aforesaid proceedings have been initiated on the basis of declaration of the loan account of the petitioner as 'fraud', which was also challenged by the petitioner before this Court in WP No.14287/2023, and vide its order dated 26/06/2023, this Court has been pleased to stay the effect and operation of the impugned fraud declaration.

4] Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the issuance of the Lookout circular against the petitioner is a consequence of the proceedings initiated by the Bank, which has also resulted in lodging of the FIR, and in the light of the aforesaid order passed by this Court, the petitioner's application ought to have been allowed by the learned Judge of the trial Court. Counsel has submitted that the petitioner is a businessman and requires to travel abroad due to his business commitments and thus, the application ought to have been allowed by the trial Court. Counsel has also relied upon the order passed by this Court in WP No.22997/2023 dated 03/10/2023, in which, this Court has also relied upon the order passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Satish Chandra Verma Vs. Union of India passed in Civil Appeal No.3802/2019 dated 09/04/2019

5] Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the respondent /CBI on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer, a reply has also been filed and it is submitted that no case for interference is made out as the petitioner has no business abroad and the present application has been filed only with a view to ensure that the petitioner may travel abroad and if allowed to go, he might never come back.. Counsel has also submitted that the total amount of fraud involved in the case is worth more than Rs.160.68 crores, and thus, the petition is liable to be dismissed.

6] Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7] From the record, it is found that so far as the order passed by this Court on 26/06/2023 in WP No.14287/2023, the same reads as under (relevant excerpts only) :-

“Learned counsel for the petitioners has relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of SBI Vs. Rajesh Agrawal in Civil Appeal No. 7300 of 2022 to contend that before declaration of the accounts to be as a fraud, opportunity of hearing has to be granted to the petitioner which has admittedly not been granted to the petitioners herein and the order has not b