LOC's Initial Validity Can't Exceed 4 Weeks, Originating Agency Must Give Reasons For Seeking Extension: Rajasthan HC Issues Guidelines

While laying down guidelines which are to be followed by concerned authorities/agencies for causing the issuance/continuance of a Look Out Circular (LOC), the Rajasthan High Court said that an order passed by the originating agency issuing an LOC must "specifically state" that it is valid only for four weeks. 

Extension of the LOC is permitted only if the originating agency provides reasons in writing, the court underscored. 

Justice Arun Monga passed the order while hearing a plea moved by a man challenging the LOC issued by the Bureau of Immigration under instructions of the Police officials (Office of Superintendent of Police, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan) pursuant to lodging of the FIR in a matrimonial dispute.

The FIR was registered on the basis of a police complaint filed by brother of the victim-wife, levelling allegations of assault, breach of trust and cruelty/demand of dowry.  

Reiterating the Supreme Court's decision in Maneka Gandhi vs Union of India recognising the right to travel abroad as a fundamental right, the High Court remarked on the indiscriminate and arbitrary issuance and continuation of LOCs.

The court took note of the fact that "quite often" the LOCs are being indiscriminately issued/ continued at the instance of the operating agencies to prevent the foreign travel of the accused persons "without proper and sufficient justification".

"This causes lot of harassment, humiliation and expenditure to the persons adversely affected by such LOCs. They have to run from pillar to post including approaching the Courts for relief. This in turn results in considerable addition to administrative work of the concerned authorities and of the Courts," the court said.  

The high court referred to a previous order–passed in the third round concerning the petitioner–where it had said, “petitioner has not been convicted of any offense; he is merely facing charges. Under the law, he is presumed innocent until proven guilty. The restrictions imposed on his passport validity appear to pre-emptively punish the petitioner, undermining the principle of presumption of innocence enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”

Thereafter to prevent the adverse effects of LOCs, the Court issued a set of guidelines in furtherance of the larger public interest. These are as follows:

“(a) The issuance or continuation of an LOC effectively suspends or invalidates the individual's passport or travel document, restricting foreign travel. This action should not be taken lightly in a casual manner, as the Supreme Court has recognized the right to travel abroad as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution (Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India). 

(b) Order for issuance of LOC can only be passed by originating agency (O.A.) in cognizable offences under IPC or other penal laws, where the accused and/or under trial, as the case may be, is deliberately evading arrest or not appearing in the trial court despite NBWs and other coercive measures and there is likelihood of the accused leaving the country to evade trial / arrest. It is thus a situation akin to issuance of NBWs in exercise of Magisterial powers, but for the difference that Home Ministry has empowered BOI to only detain / restrain a person from travelling abroad and not arrest, if he is either evading arrest or deliberately not appearing in the trial court.

(c) In cases other than falling in (b) above, while taking a decision to instruct the BOI to open / issue an LOC for preventing the subject to travel abroad, the O.A. must record reasons and grounds for his satisfaction for believing that the passport is likely to be impounded or revoked under Section 10(3)(c) by the passport authority either in the interest of sovereignty or integrity, security of India or in the interest of friendly relation of India with a foreign country or general public interest.

(d) In cases where the person in question has been granted bail, the order for issuance of LOC must not conflict with or override the terms and conditions of the bail or over reach an order passed by the court.

(e) Once an investigation is completed and a report under Section 193(3) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 173(2) of the CrPC), is submitted, any LOC issued or continued must be reported by O.A. in writing to the concerned court to ensure propriety and to prevent misuse of the power to issue order for opening an LOC or continuance thereof, as the case may be.

(f) The order passed by the O.A. for issuance of LOC must specifically state that initial validity of an LOC shall not exceed four weeks. Extensions are permissible only if the O.A. deems it appropriate and provides reasons in writing.