The Andhra Pradesh High Court recently questioned the authorities for routinely opening Look Out Circulars (LOCs) against husbands facing charges of cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)..Justice K Sreenivasa Reddy said that an LOC can be issued if the accusations against an accused are such that they are detrimental to the nation, but such measures to restrict foreign travel should not be resorted to when the offence is not grave.“Of late, in each and every case that has been registered under Section 498-A IPC, it has become common for the respondent/police, without looking into the aspects whether the petitioner is cooperating with the trial or he is evading arrest, to open the LOCs in mechanical manner. It is essential that the police have to open LOCs against the persons who are the accused for grave offences or the persons who are involved in financial irregularities or the offences which are against the Society. In such cases, the respondent/police can resort in opening the LOCs against the accused, not permitting them to leave the country,” the Bench said..The Court was hearing a plea challenging the issuance of an LOC against a man in connection with a case registered against him under Section 85 (husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and provisions of Dowry Prohibition Act by his wife.The petitioner, who is working as an electrical technician in Dubai, said that he was recently apprehended on arrival at Visakhapatnam airport. He was later released on furnishing a surety. However, the Court was told that he is now unable to leave India due to the pending LOC..The Court noted that at present, there is no warrant or any other coercive process pending against the petitioner and that he has been cooperating with the investigating agency as well as the trial court.Despite his cooperation with the investigating agency, the LOC was issued against him illegally, without any prior notice to him, the Court observed.“Petitioner states that due to pendency of LOC against him, he was unable to leave India and extended his leave for one week. He has to report for duty on 09.02.2026 and the departure date is on 08.02.2026. If the petitioner is retained under the guise of LOC, he would lose his job at Dubai. In such circumstances, it is essential for the petitioner herein to travel to Dubai on his employment purpose. Look Out Circular causes an immediate and irrevocable violation of a person’s fundamental right of movement,” it added..Concluding that the petitioner would suffer irreparable loss in case the LOC is allowed to operate continuously, the Court said,“These aspects have to be seen on the touchstone of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India. By virtue of opening LOC the personal liberty of the person would be affected. On mere registration of a case for the offence under Section 498-A IPC, opening of the LOC against the accused, will affect his career. In most of the cases under matrimonial offences, it may end in compromise or it will take much time for the case to come up for hearing. As such, it is not necessary for the respondent/police to open LOC against the petitioner herein.”Taking note of a Ministry of Home Affairs’ circular that LOCs should be issued in exceptional cases, the Court quashed the travel restriction against the petitioner..Advocate G Seena Kumar represented the petitioner..[Read Judgment].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.
