Rajasthan High Court Sets Rules for Issuing and Continuing Look Out Circulars.

The Rajasthan High Court criticized the excessive use of Look Out Circulars (LOCs) by investigation agencies to stop people from traveling abroad without proper reasons. This criticism arose from a case where an LOC was issued against someone involved in a marital dispute. The Bureau of Immigration issued the LOC based on instructions from the Rajasthan Police. The Court explored the background of LOCs, pointing out that the term “LOC” is not found in the Passport Act but was introduced by an Office Memorandum from the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) in 1979. Since then, the MHA has broadened the use of LOCs to cover not just national security but also other crimes and economic issues. Justice Arun Monga remarked that individuals often have to go through many obstacles, including seeking help from the Courts, which adds to the workload of authorities and the Courts, ultimately harming the public interest.

The Court provided clear guidelines for issuing or continuing Look Out Circulars (LOCs), which are mainly used to monitor and prevent accused individuals from traveling abroad. The guidelines are as follows:

1. Issuing or continuing an LOC suspends or invalidates the person’s passport or travel document, limiting their ability to travel internationally. This decision should be made carefully, as the Supreme Court has acknowledged the right to travel abroad as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution (Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India).
2. Only the originating agency (O.A.) can order the issuance of an LOC in cases of cognizable offenses under the IPC or other laws, where the accused is intentionally avoiding arrest or not showing up in court despite non-bailable warrants and other enforcement actions. There is a risk that the accused may leave the country to escape trial or arrest. This process is similar to issuing non-bailable warrants, but the Home Ministry has authorized the Bureau of Immigration (BOI) to only prevent someone from traveling abroad, not to arrest them, if they are evading arrest or failing to appear in court.
3. In situations not covered in the previous point, when deciding to instruct the BOI to issue an LOC to stop someone from traveling abroad, the O.A. must document the reasons for believing that the passport may be revoked or impounded under Section 10(3)(c) by the passport authority. This can be due to concerns about national sovereignty, security, relations with other countries, or public interest.
4. If a person has been granted bail, the issuance of a Look Out Circular (LOC) should not conflict with the bail terms or contradict any court orders.
5. After an investigation is finished and a report under Section 193(3) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is submitted, any LOC that is issued or continued must be reported in writing by the O.A. to the relevant court. This ensures proper use of the power to issue or continue an LOC.
6. The O.A. must clearly state that the initial validity of an LOC cannot exceed four weeks. Extensions are allowed only if the O.A. finds it necessary and provides written reasons.
7. The individual affected, as per Section 10-A of the Act, must be given a chance to be heard within eight weeks of the LOC being issued or continued. The O.A. should refer the case to the Central Government promptly, allowing them to conduct a hearing and, if needed, change or cancel the LOC order in writing.
8. If there is no cognizable offense, the passport holder cannot be stopped from leaving the country. In such cases, the O.A. can only ask to be informed about the person’s arrival or departure.
9. The originating agency must review LOCs every three months and provide written reasons for their decisions. If an LOC is no longer necessary, proposals for its removal should be submitted right away, and deletion requests must be sent to the BOI quickly to protect individual freedoms.

Nishant Bora represented the petitioner, while Vikram Rajpurohit served as the Public Prosecutor for the Respondent. The Court noted that issuing a Look Out Circular (LOC) without starting a process to impound or revoke a passport goes against the Passport Act. This Act only permits such actions if there is clear evidence that they are needed for national security or public interest. In this case, the Court found no evidence of a request to impound or revoke the passport, and the affected person was not given a chance to be heard. As a result, the Court decided that keeping the LOC against the petitioner was not justified and ordered the police to tell the Bureau of Immigration to cancel or close the LOC against the petitioner.

Cause Title: Abhayjeet Singh & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., [2024:RJ-JD:42547]