Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Rama Krishna Raju Samanthapudi, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 27 October, 2021
Bench: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
Writ Petition No.24445 of 2021
Order:
This writ petition is filed seeking mandamus to declare the
impugned Look-Out Circular (LOC), dated 28-12-2020, issued
against the petitioner by the 4th respondent-The Bureau of
Immigration, New Delhi, represented by its Commissioner,
as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently prayed
to set aside the said LOC.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned
Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for
respondents 1 and 3; Sri T.M. Chaitanya, learned Special Public
Prosecutor for CID appearing for respondent No.2; and the learned
Assistant Solicitor General appearing for respondents 4, 5 and 7.
3. As this writ petition is being disposed of with a direction
to the petitioner to approach the trial Court and file an application
seeking cancellation of LOC in view of the earlier judgments of this
Court, no notice is required to be given to the 6th respondent.
4. Having regard to the relief claimed by the petitioner to
declare the impugned LOC issued against the petitioner as illegal
and to set aside the same, it is to be noticed that the legal position
involved in this writ petition is not res integra and the same has
been well settled. The erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in
the case of Dasari Sudheer v. State of Andhra Pradesh1 held in
para-8 of the judgment that the petitioner can approach the officer
1 2015(3) ALT 1
2
who ordered issuance of LOC or it is open for him to approach the
trial Court which can rescind the LOC issued on an appropriate
application made by the person concerned. Ultimately the Court
held in the said judgment that as the charge-sheet is filed in the
said case that the petitioner can approach the trial Court and
move an application for withdrawal of LOC. In arriving at the said
conclusion, the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh relied on
the judgment of Madras High Court rendered in the case of
S.Martin v. Deputy Commissioner of Police2 and also the
judgment of Delhi High Court rendered in the case of Sumer
Singh Salkan; Court On Its Own Motion Re v. Assistant
Director and Others; and also a judgment rendered in the case of
State v. Gurnek Singh Etc3.
5. On the basis of the said judgment of the erstwhile High
Court of Andhra Pradesh in Dasari Sudheer's case, this Court
very recently in W.P.No.3506 of 2021, as per order dated
14-9-2021, also directed the petitioner therein to file
an application before the trial Court and also in W.P.No.24042 of
2021, as per order dated 22-10-2021, directed the petitioner to
approach the concerned authority who issued the LOC.
6. Therefore, in view of the above earlier orders of this Court
and in view of the law enunciated in the above judgments, this
writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to
approach the trial Court and move an application to cancel the
2 2014 Law Suit (Madras) 250
3 (2) 2010 Law Suit (Delhi) 1628
3
LOC on the grounds which are now urged before this Court as it is
stated that charge-sheet has already been filed in the trial Court.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner expressed his difficulty
to approach the trial Court stating that this Court granted stay of
further proceedings of the trial Court in Crl. P. No.2038 of 2021.
The said order of stay pertains only to trial of the case. It cannot
come in the way of considering the application for cancellation of
LOC. Therefore, the learned Judge of the trial Court is directed to
consider the application of the petitioner for cancellation of LOC
notwithstanding the order passed by this Court staying further
proceedings in C.C.No.765 of 2021 on the file of the II Additional
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada, as considering the
application of the petitioner for cancellation of LOC has nothing to
do with the trial of the matter. The trial Court has to only see
whether the petitioner would be available for trial in the trial
Court or not, while considering the said application. If necessary
by imposing appropriate conditions to ensure his presence during
the course of trial, the trial Court can consider the application of
the petitioner for cancellation of LOC, if the Court ultimately finds
justification in cancelling the said LOC on the grounds urged by
the petitioner. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed.
No costs.
_________________________________________
CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J.
27th October, 2021.
Ak
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
Writ Petition No.24445 of 2021
27th October, 2021.
(Ak)
