The

order

dated

09.06.2023

passed

by

the

3^rd

respondent at Annexure ‘A’, by which, the petitioner’s request

to revoke the Look Out Circular (‘LOC’ for short) against him

has been rejected.

The Crime Investigation Department registered the

FIR in Cr.No.9/2019 against 19 accused alleging that they had

hacked the E-Procurement Portal of Government of Karnataka,

and in the said crime the petitioner’s brother is arrayed as

accused No.1. The police after investigation laid the charge

sheet for the offences under Sections 120B, 201, 204, 384,

- 3 -

419, 420 r/w Sections 34, 35 and 37 of IPC and Sections 43,

66, 66(C) and (D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

3.

The respondent No.3 initiated proceedings in

ECIR.No.4/2020 under the provisions of Prevention of Money

Laundering Act, 2002 (‘Act’ for short) against the petitioner’s

brother and other accused.

4.

On

27.11.2020,

the

Central

Crime

Branch

registered the FIR in Cr.No.153/2020 against the petitioner’s

brother and other accused for the offence punishable under

Section 120B, 384, 419, 420 and 471 IPC alleging that the

accused had hacked the inter poker games. Based on the

registration of the FIR in Cr.No.153/2020, respondent no.2

initiated proceedings in ECIR No.1/2021 under the provisions of

the Act against the petitioner’s brother and other accused.

5.

The petitioner who was working at Netherlands

came to India on 12.08.2021, and he was issued with

summons under Section 50 of the Act to appear before the 3^rd

respondent in ECIR.No.1/2021 and pursuant to the same he

appeared on 29.12.2021, 30.12.2021 and 01.01.2022 and his

statements were recorded on the said dates of his appearance.

On 13.01.2022, when the petitioner was to board his flight to

Netherlands, at that time, the respondent – authorities

restrained the petitioner from proceeding to Netherlands and

affixed an endorsement on the petitioner's passport with the

seal 'Cancelled'. However the copy of the LOC was not

furnished to the petitioner.

- 4 -

6.

The petitioner filed W.P.No.1730/2022 for quashing

the endorsement on his passport. During the pendency of the

petition, the 3^rd respondent issued summons under Section 50

of PML Act to appear in ECIR 1/2021, and in furtherance

thereto, the petitioner appeared on 05.05.2022, and his

statements were recorded. On 31.05.2022, the petitioner was

again issued with summons under Section 50 of the PML Act in

ECIR 1/2021 and in furtherance thereto the petitioner

appeared and his statements were recorded on 01.06.2022.

The W.P.No.1730/2022 was rejected and liberty was reserved

to the petitioner and it was left open to the petitioner to

cooperate with the investigation and convince the investigating

agency that he had no role in the money laundering case

registered against his brother, and thereafter request for

withdraw of the LOC issued against him.

7.

The petitioner filed writ appeal, and in the said writ

appeal, the petitioner filed an application for withdrawal of the

writ appeal. However, the writ appeal was dismissed for want

of prosecution. The petitioner having not received any

summons from the 3^rd respondent submitted representation to

revoke the LOC. Since the petitioner's request was not

acceded to, the petitioner was compelled to approach this court

in W.P.No.30/2023. During the pendency of the writ petition,

the petitioner was issued with summons to appear on

24.02.2023. The W.P.No.30/2023 was disposed of reserving

liberty as set out in para 15 of the order and direction was

issued to complete the investigation insofar it relates to the

- 5 -

petitioner within an outer limit of six weeks, and thereafter the

respondent no.3 shall consider the representation submitted by

the petitioner for withdraw of the LOC.

8. Despite the order passed by this court, the 3^rd

respondent did not consider the request of the petitioner.

However, the email was sent to the petitioner calling upon him

to be present on 11.05.2023. In furtherance of the em