Legal Provisions Involved: Sections 406, 420, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Article 21 and Article 226 of the Constitution of India
Judgement by: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi
Judge/Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
Facts
The petitioner, Maria Ramesh, sought quashing of a Look-Out Circular (LOC) issued against her in connection with FIR No. 218/2020 registered under Sections 406/420/120-B IPC for disputes arising from a real estate investment MoU. She was granted anticipatory bail in August 2022. Despite cooperating with the investigation and not being called for investigation for over three years, the LOC continued to restrict her travel.
Key legal provisions
Sections 406, 420, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Article 21 and Article 226 of the Constitution of India
Issues raised
- Whether the continuation of the LOC was justified in the absence of any criminal proceedings or non-cooperation by the petitioner?
- Whether the LOC violated the petitioner’s fundamental right to travel under Article 21?
Arguments
The petitioner argued that she had fully cooperated with the investigation, was never called post-bail, posed no flight risk, and had complied with all prior travel conditions imposed by the Court. The respondent’s Status Report acknowledged that the petitioner had no major role in the investigation, yet sought continuation of the LOC.
Judgement
The Court quashed the LOC, holding that its mechanical continuation without necessity for investigation was arbitrary and violated Article 21. The petitioner was directed to file an undertaking to cooperate with the investigation and intimate the investigating agency before foreign travel.
Click here to VIEW the full judgement
