The Enforcement Directorate (ED) told the Supreme Court on Friday that it has withdrawn the look-out circulars (LOC) imposing travel restrictions on Trinamool Congress (TMC) Member of Parliament (MP) Abhishek Banerjee and his wife. [Abhishek Banerjee and anr vs Directorate of Enforcement].

A bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia took the submission on record, while also observing that there are consequences when such circulars are issued against anyone.

"Mr SV Raju, Ld ASG states that permission have been granted from time to time. Fact remains that there are consequences of LOC and they were stopped at the airport. ASG in usual fairness states that if petitioner informs one week in advance necessary orders will be issued. In any case, the LOC shall stand withdrawn," the Court noted in its order.

The bench had on July 24 reiterated that citizens have a right to travel abroad, especially for medical reasons. The Supreme Court had also questioned the ED on why such a look out notice was being issued against Banerjee and his wife.

The top court was hearing a batch of pleas concerning the summons issued by the ED to various political leaders, requiring them to come for interrogation to Delhi.

Notably, the pleas before Court included petitions by K Kavitha and Nalini Chidambaram, which raised questions of whether a woman can be summoned by the ED for questioning to another city on short notice.

The bench adjourned these matters today after stating that they need to be heard on merits.

Six weeks' time was given for the ED to file its counter-affidavit, and two weeks thereafter was given to the petitioners for their rejoinders.

The lead petition heard today, by Banerjee, raised grievance against the central agency imposing restrictions on his travel so as to interrogate him.

After being informed that the LOC has been withdrawn, senior counsel Kapil Sibal, appearing for Banerjee today, pointed out that the Court still needed to examine if the ED can summon anyone to Delhi for its investigations.

"Issue that needs to be decided if ED can call anyone to Delhi for investigation. This has to be decided. Issue is can they summon her to Delhi? It is not a Section 161 statement," Sibal submitted.

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju replied that in Banerjee's case, he comes to Delhi since he is an MP. Hence, he should not raise issue when he is summoned to the ED's Delhi office, the ASG said.

The matter was eventually adjourned, after the Court agreed that case needs to be decided on merits.

In May last year, the Supreme Court had allowed Banerjee and his wife to be interrogated at the ED’s Kolkata Office.

This was after the couple moved the top Court against a Delhi High Court order dismissing their challenge to an ED summons in connection with its investigation into a high-profile coal mining scam in West Bengal.

The plea by K Kavitha, Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) leader and daughter of Telangana Chief Minister, K Chandrashekar Rao concerns a summons issued by the ED in the Delhi excise policy scam case.

The petition by Nalini Chidambaram was filed in relation to the ED's probe into the Saradha Chit fund scam.