Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Nature and Validity of Look Out Circulars (LOCs) - LOCs are issued primarily based on requests from banks or authorities to prevent individuals from leaving the country when there are outstanding dues or suspicions of misconduct. They are not issued arbitrarily; there must be sufficient material and adherence to guidelines, such as those issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs ["Mannoj Kumar Jain VS Union of India - Calcutta"], ["Preet Kaur vs Bureau Of Immigration - Delhi"]. For example, The issuance of Look Out Circulars cannot be resorted to in each and every case of bank loan defaults or credit facilities ["Preet Kaur vs Bureau Of Immigration - Delhi"] and The legality and/or validity of a Look Out Circular has to be adjudged having regard to the circumstances prevailing on the date on which the request for issuance was made ["Kovuru Rohini Reddy vs UCO Bank - Telangana"].
Procedural Safeguards and Application of Mind - Courts emphasize that LOCs should not be issued in haste or without proper application of mind. There must be a rational basis, and the authority must consider whether the issuance is justified, especially since LOCs restrict fundamental rights such as the right to travel ["Preet Kaur vs Bureau Of Immigration - Delhi"], ["Himayath Ali Khan, S/o Gulzar Ali Khan VS Ministry Of Home Affairs - Karnataka"]. Some judgments highlight that the authority opening the Look Out Circular must satisfy itself that the departure of a person... would be detrimental to the sovereignty or security or integrity of India ["Preet Kaur vs Bureau Of Immigration - Delhi"].
Challenges and Judicial Review - Several cases involve petitioners challenging LOCs for being illegal, arbitrary, or issued without proper grounds. Courts have quashed LOCs where they found procedural lapses, lack of material, or violation of guidelines. For instance, Circular is quashed ["Pathuri Praveen VS Union of India - Telangana"], and The action of the respondents in issuing Look Out Circulars without proper application of mind was declared bad in law ["BANK OF BARODA vs PINNACLE VEHICLES AND SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED - Kerala"].
Right to Travel and Exceptions - The courts recognize the fundamental right to travel abroad. However, this right can be restricted if the LOC is issued based on credible material indicating threat to security, public interest, or economic stability. Yet, the issuance of Look Out Circulars cannot be resorted to in every case of bank loan defaults ["Preet Kaur vs Bureau Of Immigration - Delhi"], and Non-pendency of criminal cases alone does not justify the issuance of LOC ["Kovuru Rohini Reddy vs UCO Bank - Telangana"].
Impact of Guidelines and Orders - The Union of India issued guidelines (e.g., Office Memorandum dated 22.02.2021) emphasizing that LOCs should be issued with due diligence and based on credible material. Several judgments refer to these guidelines, noting that violations can render LOCs illegal ["Kovuru Rohini Reddy vs UCO Bank - Telangana"], ["N. Prithvi Teja VS Bureau of Immigration - Telangana"].
Case-specific Outcomes - Many petitioners successfully obtained relief where LOCs were found to be issued prematurely, without proper basis, or in violation of procedures. For example, The LOC was issued in haste and is liable to be set aside ["Himayath Ali Khan, S/o Gulzar Ali Khan VS Ministry Of Home Affairs - Karnataka"], and the LOC issued against the petitioner was set aside ["Pathuri Praveen VS Union of India - Telangana"].
Analysis and Conclusion:Look Out Circulars are powerful tools used by banks and authorities to prevent individuals from leaving the country in cases of financial default, suspected misconduct, or security concerns. However, their issuance must adhere to procedural safeguards, be based on credible material, and involve proper application of mind to avoid arbitrary restrictions on citizens' fundamental rights. Courts have consistently held that LOCs can be challenged and quashed if issued without proper grounds, in violation of guidelines, or in haste. Therefore, while LOCs serve important economic and security interests, they must be issued judiciously and transparently, respecting constitutional protections ["Mannoj Kumar Jain VS Union of India - Calcutta"], ["Kovuru Rohini Reddy vs UCO Bank - Telangana"], ["Pathuri Praveen VS Union of India - Telangana"].
Imagine planning an international trip, only to be stopped at the airport due to a Look Out Circular (LOC) issued at a bank's request. This scenario is more common than you might think, especially in cases involving loan defaults or non-performing assets (NPAs). If you've ever wondered, What is a look out circular by bank?, this guide breaks it down, drawing from judicial precedents and regulatory frameworks.
Banks often request LOCs from authorities like the Bureau of Immigration to prevent borrowers from leaving the country amid disputes. However, courts have frequently intervened, suspending or quashing such circulars when procedural fairness is lacking. We'll explore the legal landscape, RBI's role, borrower rights, and practical steps.
A Look Out Circular is an alert issued by government agencies, such as the Bureau of Immigration or police, to watch out for and potentially detain individuals at borders. Banks initiate these in civil disputes, like loan recoveries, as a matter of abundant caution when there's a risk of the borrower fleeing. For instance, in one case, a bank requested an LOC against a company director due to default on a loan taken abroad. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY FOR NCT OF DELHI - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 2028
Key triggers include:- Loan Defaults/NPAs: Banks flag willful defaulters.- No Criminal Charges: Often issued without pending criminal proceedings, purely on civil grounds. Kovuru Rohini Reddy vs UCO Bank - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 33625- Preventive Measure: To ensure recovery, not prosecution.
However, LOCs aren't automatic. Courts emphasize that there must exist sufficient material with the respondents to invoke action for opening of a Look Out Circular. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY FOR NCT OF DELHI - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 2028
Reserve Bank of India (RBI) circulars play a pivotal role, issued under Sections 21 and 35A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. These are statutory and binding on banks, creating enforceable rights for borrowers. Sardar Associates VS Punjab & Sind Bank - 2009 0 Supreme(SC) 1357
For example:- RBI guidelines on one-time settlement (OTS) of NPAs must be followed, allowing borrowers to invoke schemes via writs or tribunals. Sardar Associates VS Punjab & Sind Bank - 2009 0 Supreme(SC) 1357- Courts stay proceedings based on RBI findings, respecting regulatory authority. Delhi Development Authority VS Skipper Construction Co. (P) Ltd. - 2000 0 Supreme(SC) 2133
RBI directions on securities, bill discounting, and rediscounting also have the force of law, with expansive interpretations under the Special Court Act. Sudhir Shantilal Mehta VS C. B. I. - 2009 0 Supreme(SC) 1425
Banks must adhere strictly, as circulars like the February 12, 2018 guidelines (under Sections 35A, 35AA, 35AB, and RBI Act Section 45(L)) are binding. A circular issued by RBI is binding upon a bank. Impex Ferro Tech Ltd. VS Punjab National Bank - 2019 Supreme(Cal) 112
Petitioners often file writ petitions when denied a copy of the LOC or when no criminal case exists. Courts typically direct suspension or quashing. Common grounds:
In DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY FOR NCT OF DELHI - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 2028, the court noted the bank's counter-affidavit was silent on sufficient material, highlighting procedural lapses.
Even in criminal contexts, like NIA cases, special provisions apply, but civil bank LOCs face stricter scrutiny. ABHAY NAYAK VS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THROUGH - STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION MARDUM - 2019 Supreme(Chh) 976
RBI circulars don't just bind banks—they empower borrowers:- OTS Rights: Courts enforce OTS schemes, issuing writs of mandamus. Sardar Associates VS Punjab & Sind Bank - 2009 0 Supreme(SC) 1357- Judicial Deference: Proceedings stayed pending RBI orders. Delhi Development Authority VS Skipper Construction Co. (P) Ltd. - 2000 0 Supreme(SC) 2133- Expansive Scope: Bill discounting treated as securities transactions under RBI directions. Sudhir Shantilal Mehta VS C. B. I. - 2009 0 Supreme(SC) 1425
Yet, banks retain rights, like initiating insolvency under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, even amid RBI guidelines. Impex Ferro Tech Ltd. VS Punjab National Bank - 2019 Supreme(Cal) 112
LOCs may persist if:- Criminal proceedings are active.- Sufficient material justifies issuance.- Facts like suppression affect petitions.
Clarificatory circulars, like SBI's on VRS, underscore banks' cautionary approaches but don't override rights. Assistant General Manager, State Bank of India VS Radhey Shyam Pandey - 2015 Supreme(SC) 188
Tax-related notices to banks (e.g., under Income Tax Act Section 194A) are distinct and often set aside if inapplicable. UCO Bank VS Union of India - 2014 Supreme(Del) 2418
Leverage RBI schemes for settlement.
For Banks:
Provide justification in affidavits. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY FOR NCT OF DELHI - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 2028
Travel Tip: Check immigration status before trips.
Disclaimer: This is general information based on precedents like Sardar Associates VS Punjab & Sind Bank - 2009 0 Supreme(SC) 1357, Delhi Development Authority VS Skipper Construction Co. (P) Ltd. - 2000 0 Supreme(SC) 2133, and others. It is not legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your specific situation, as outcomes depend on facts.
Stay informed on RBI updates to safeguard your rights in banking disputes.
#LookOutCircular #BankLOC #RBIGuidelines
The Look Out Circular in the present case has not been produced by the respondent Bank and hence the Court cannot refer to the contents of the Look Out Circular which has been issued against the petitioners. ... (A) No. 22748 of 2022 is accordingly allowed by quashing the impugned Look Out Circular issued by the respondent no. 8 Bank. ... The petitioners have also made payments to Andhra Bank (Union Bank of India) ....
It is stated that the petitioner was not provided with a copy of Look Out Circular and that there are no criminal proceedings pending against her, as such, she filed the present writ petition seeking to suspend the operation of Look Out Circular issued against the petitioner. ... and consequently to direct the respondent No.4 to quash the Look Out Circular issued by him at the instance of respondent No.1. ... Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities ....
It is stated that the petitioner was not provided with a copy of Look Out Circular and that there are no criminal proceedings pending against her, as such, she filed the present writ petition seeking to suspend the operation of Look Out Circular issued against the petitioner. ... and consequently to direct the respondent No.4 to quash the Look Out Circular issued by him at the instance of respondent No.1. ... Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities ....
It is stated that the petitioner was not provided with a copy of Look Out Circular and that there are no criminal proceedings pending against her, as such, she filed the present writ petition seeking to suspend the operation of Look Out Circular issued against the petitioner. ... and consequently to direct the respondent No.4 to quash the Look Out Circular issued by him at the instance of respondent No.1. ... Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities ....
Director thereof, a request was made for opening of a Look Out Circular as a matter of abundant caution. ... There must exist sufficient material with the respondents to invoke action for opening of a Look Out Circular. The counter affidavit on behalf of respondent no. 2-bank is completely silent on these aspects. 13. ... In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no.2-bank, at whose behest the Look Out Circular was opened, the stand take....
The Look Out Circulars cannot be opened merely on the request of the banks. There has to be some application of mind by the authority concerned opening the Look Out Circular since the opening of Look Out Circular results in restraining a person's right to travel abroad. ... of reasons either prior or post issuance of the look- out circular and extension of look-out circular to such individuals who in the opinion of the authorities o....
to direct respondent No.4 to quash the Look Out Circular issued by him at the instance of respondent No.1. ... the petitioner is not being allowed to travel abroad, he filed the present writ petition seeking to suspend the operation of Look Out Circular issued against the petitioner. ... Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities to suspend the operation of Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against the petitioner so as to enable him to travel to Dubai in ....
to direct respondent No.4 to quash the Look Out Circular issued by him at the instance of respondent No.1. ... the petitioner is not being allowed to travel abroad, he filed the present writ petition seeking to suspend the operation of Look Out Circular issued against the petitioner. ... Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities to suspend the operation of Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against the petitioner so as to enable him to travel to Dubai in ....
to direct respondent No.4 to quash the Look Out Circular issued by him at the instance of respondent No.1. ... the petitioner is not being allowed to travel abroad, he filed the present writ petition seeking to suspend the operation of Look Out Circular issued against the petitioner. ... Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities to suspend the operation of Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against the petitioner so as to enable him to travel to Dubai in ....
had quashed the said Look Out Circular(s) qua the petitioner therein. ... The sole basis for issuance of the Look Out Circular by the Bank is default by the Company Gulf Petrochem FZC, UAE in repayment of loan taken in UAE and no material has been produced by the respondents to claim any element of criminal culpability on the parts of the petitioners, hence the petition. ... In compliance of the above order respondent No.3 and 4 had filed duly sworn affidvit dated 15.01.2026 of Mayank Kumar, Assistant G....
C.V. Bhaskar Reddy, J. 1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking to declare the action of the Respondents in issuing Look Out Circular (LOC) against the petitioner No. 1 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently, prayed this Court to set aside/quash the same and direct the Respondents not to obstruct/restrain the Petitioner No. 1 from travelling to and fro from the country vide Passport No.W2210071. The issuance of a Look Out Circular by a bank against a guarantor is unconstitutional if it violates fundamental rights and lacks proper authority un....
The Immigration Bureau, New Delhi, informed the Superintendent of Police, Bastar that the appellant has been taken into custody. Thereafter, Bastar Police issued Look Out Circular. He was enquired by Bastar Police at Delhi and thereafter, upon his consent, Laptop, Mobile, Hard Disk, Pen Drive, etc. were recovered and brought to Bastar for further investigation. 5. When the police team went to Bangalore (Karnataka) it got information that the appellant is not available in the country, but is travelling abroad with unknown location.
The Guidelines dated February 12, 2018 states that, it was issued in exercise of powers conferred under Sections 35A, 35AA and 35AB of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 and Section 45(L) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934. This is the view expressed in Suhir Shantilal Mehta (supra). 8. A circular issued by the Reserve Bank of India is binding upon a bank.
When the scheme was in operation, the competent authority i.e. Deputy Managing Director had issued a circular dated 10/15.1.2001 clarifying the position that the employees could withdraw their applications made under SBI VRS by 15.2.2001 and those employees who have not completed 20 years of pensionable service, are not eligible for pension. The said circular cannot be given any type of nomenclature other than a clarificatory circular, despite treated as such. There can be no doubt, by abundant caution, the bank issued a clarificatory circular. It is graphically clear from ....
1. The writ petition (W.P.(C) No.3563/2012) has been filed challenging a notice dated 25.04.2012 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi (hereafter ‘ACIT’) whereby the petitioner bank was directed to submit the details of deposits made with the petitioner bank by all litigants in the name of Registrar General of this Court during the Financial Years 2005-06 to 2010-11. 8/2011 dated 14.10.2011 (hereafter ‘impugned circular’) issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) whereby it was clarified that in cases where deposits were made in terms of directions issued by Court, t....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
