Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court has upheld the 'right to travel abroad' and set aside the lookout circulars (LoCs) issued by the Bureau of Immigration at the request of the Union Bank of India.

The present case arose from a writ petition filed by the petitioner company, challenging the lookout circulars (LoCs) issued by the Bureau of Immigration at the request of Union Bank of India. The LoCs were issued against a former company director who had provided a personal guarantee for a loan that went into default.

The Bench led by Justice Subramoniun Prasad quashed the lookout circulars while reaffirming the right to travel abroad under Article 21. The Bench said, "Mere inability to repay a debt, in the absence of any criminal proceedings, cannot serve as grounds to deprive a person of the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India."

However, the court clarified and said, "This Court has not made any observation regarding the lookout circulars that have been issued against the petitioner's company at the instance of CBI or any other investigating agencies.".

The court highlighted that lookout circulars should be issued only in exceptional circumstances and not as a routine practice. It clarified that while the office memorandum allows for issuing a lookout circular even when an individual is not involved in any offence under the IPC or other penal laws, this power must be exercised cautiously.

"No doubt an FIR has been registered against the petitioners by the CBI and the petitioners have been arraigned as accused in the said FIR, but that alone cannot be a reason for continuing the lookout circular issued at the instance of the bank, "Justice Subramaniam added.

Advocate Gaurav Gupta, appearing for the petitioner company, argued before the bench that the fundamental right to travel abroad cannot be curtailed on the ground that the petitioner has defaulted on the loan.

In conclusion, the court also noted, "The issuance of a lookout circular cannot be resorted to in every case of bank loan defaults or credit facilities availed for business, and the fundamental right of a citizen of the country to travel abroad cannot be curtailed only because of failure to repay a bank loan."

For Petitioners: Mr. Gaurav Gupta and Mr. Nikhil Kohli, Advocates.

Respondents: Mr Ajay Digpaul CGSC, Mr Kamal Digpaul, Ms Ekta Choudhary, Mr Divyank Dutt Dwivedi and Ms Aditi Sharma,
Mr Amrendra Kumar Singh, along with Mr Sanidhya Kumar

Case Title: PREET KAUR AND ANR. V BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION AND OTHERS