Madras High Court
Veeraraghavan vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Police on 7 October, 2021
Crl.O.P.No.7978 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.10.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
Crl.O.P.No.7978 of 2021
Veeraraghavan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Deputy Commissioner of Police,
Ambattur District,
Avadi,
Chennai-600 054.
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Poonamallee Range,
Poonamallee,
Chennai.
3.Inspector of Police,
W30-All Women Police Station,
Poonamallee,
Chennai.
(Crime No.15 of 2020).
4.The Assistant Director/SIC,
R.K.Puram, Sector-I, BOI Quarters,
East Block VIII, Sec-1,
R.K.Puram,
New Delhi-110 066. ... Respondents
[4th respondent is impleaded as per order
of this Court, dated 20.06.2021 in
Crl.M.P.No.6223 of 2021 in
Crl.O.P.No.7978 of 2021]
Page 1 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.7978 of 2021
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, to direct the 1st respondent to withdraw the Look Out
Circular as against the petitioner in connection with the Crime No.15 of 2020
on the file of the Inspector of Police, W30-All Women Police Station,
Poonamallee, Thiruvallur District.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sasikumar
For R1 to R3 : Mr.A.Damodaran,
Additional Public Prosecutor
For R4 : Mr.D.Simon,
Central Government Standing Counsel
*****
ORDER
The petitioner/accused in Crime No.15 of 2020 for offence under
Section 498A, 406, 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act,
has filed this petition to direct the 1st respondent to withdraw the Look Out
Circular issued against the petitioner on the request of the 3rd respondent
Police.
2.The gist of the complaint is that on 17.02.2019, the marriage held
between the petitioner and the defacto complainant in Crime No.15 of 2020 in
Thirumalai Hills, Thirupathi and reception was held in Pathmavathy Mahal,
Vanagaram, Chennai. During the marriage, customary Sridhana articles were
presented by the family members of the defacto complainant. Thereafter, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.7978 of 2021
jewels and valuables kept in the joint locker at Repco Bank, T.Nagar, Chennai,
wherein the defacto complainant's father is the General Manager. After the
marriage, the defacto complainant continued her studies staying with her
parents and the petitioner had gone to Muscat, Oman for employment.
Thereafter, some misunderstanding arouse between the petitioner and the
defacto complainant due to demand of dowry. Later, the defacto complainant
had gone to Muscat where again dispute arouse between them and she came
back to India and continued to stay with her parents. On 26.01.2020, the
defacto complainant sent her uncle Radhakrishnan to collect locker key to get
back her jewels and valuables from the Repco Bank, T.Nagar, Chennai. On
30.01.2020, the petitioner called his father-in-law through mobile phone and
threatened him and finally, he agreed to handover the locker key. The defacto
complainant appeared and waited for the petitioner in the bank, but the
petitioner failed to appear and failed to return the locker key. Hence, the
defacto complainant gave a letter to the bank not to permit operation of the
locker. Coming to know about the same, the petitioner threatened the defacto
complainant and her family members. Hence, she lodged a complaint to the
3rd respondent Police.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.7978 of 2021
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is
working as Site Engineer at Alldrak International Trading L.L.C at Oman from
February 2016 onwards. Due to his hard work and dedication, he was
promoted as Project Coordinator. After the marriage, there was some
misunderstanding between the petitioner and the defacto complainant. Due to
evil advice of her parents, she lodged a complaint as though the petitioner
demanded dowry. Without conducting proper enquiry, the 3rd respondent
Police arrayed the petitioner and his entire family members as accused and the
defacto complainant made allegations that the jewels and the valuables
presented during the marriage were retained by the petitioner and his family.
On registration of the case, the petitioner moved Anticipatory Bail in
Crl.O.P.No.3013 of 2021 before this Court. While the same was pending, the
3rd respondent Police made arrangement for issuance of Look Out Circular
against the petitioner through the 1st respondent. On 03.02.2021, the 1st
respondent wrote a letter to the 4th respondent requesting to issue Look Out
Circular against the petitioner. The learned counsel further submitted that the
3rd respondent called the petitioner to appear for enquiry. The petitioner sent
E-mail to the 3rd respondent explaining his situation and unavailability of
flights from Oman to Chennai due to COVID-19 pandemic situation. The
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.7978 of 2021
petitioner requested his family members to attend the enquiry and they
attended enquriy twice before the 3rd respondent Police. Thereafter, the
petitioner left from Oman, and he reached Trivandrum Airport on 18.02.2021,
the immigration officials enquired the petitioner on the basis of the Look Out
Circular and detained him in their custody and informed the detention of the
petitioner to the 3rd respondent, who took custody of the petitioner on
19.02.2021.
4.The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the
petitioner was taken to Repco Bank, T.Nagar Branch, Chennai, where the
locker was opened all jewels and valuables handed over to the defacto
complainant. Later, the petitioner was arrested, immediately produced before
the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Poonamallee on 20.02.2021 and
thereafter, he was let out on bail. The respondents 1 to 3 having knowledge
that the petitioner filed Anticipatory Bail before this Court, made
arrangements for issuance of Look Out Circular projecting him as absconding
accused and he attempting to flee from India. The learned counsel further
submitted that to curtail the petitioner's employment in Oman, the Look Out
Circular has been issued. The presence of the petitioner in Oman is very much
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.7978 of 2021
necessary, since his position as project coordinator is indispensable. The 3rd
respondent in connivance with the defacto complainant had arranged for
issuance of the Look Out Circular and thereby, curtailed the movement of the
petitioner. The petitioner is a lawful passport holder with travel permit and he
is to travel abroad in connection with his employment. The issue between the
petitioner and the defacto complainant is only a matrimonial dispute.
5.The learned counsel further submitted that the Hon'ble Apex Court as
well as this Court time and again held that in the case of matrimonial dispute,
the Investigating Agency not to be in haste and register FIR and shall take all
steps to resolve the matrimonial dispute. In this case, no such steps taken by
the 3rd respondent Police and the FIR registered on the same day of lodging
the complaint violating the guidelines and principles laid down by the Hon'ble
Apex court. Thus, issuance of the Look Out Circular as though the petitioner
is an absconding accused is unwarranted. Hence, he prayed for removal of the
Look Out Circular issued against the petitioner.
6.Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the
respondents 1 to 3 filed the counter and submitted that based on the complaint,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.7978 of 2021
a case was registered by the 3rd respondent Police in Crime No.15 of 2021, for
offence under Sections 498(A), 406, 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act against the accused (A1 to A5) on 03.12.2020. During
the course of investigation, the 3rd respondent Police examined the defacto
complainant and other witnesses and recorded their statements. On
12.01.2021, a requisition letter was sent to the Bureau of Immigration (MHA)
Government of India, Shastri Bhawan, Chennai for passport details of the
petitioner and the report was received on 22.01.2021. He further submitted
that on apprehension of arrest, all the accused filed Anticipatory bail before
this Court in Crl.O.P.Nos.3013 & 20938 of 2020, wherein this Court by order,
dated 17.02.2021 recorded that 'the Learned counsel for the accused is
directed to instructed the accused that A1 shall come to India and hand over
the jewels within two weeks, till then, the respondent police shall not arrest
the accused persons'.
7.On 03.02.2021, the 1st respondent sent requisition letter to the 4th
respondent for opening Look out Circular against the petitioner holding
passport No.M2170044. On 18.02.2021, the 3rd respondent Police received an
information from the Inspector SHO, Valiyathura Police Station,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.7978 of 2021
Thiruvananthapuram about the petitioner detained based on the Look Out
Circular. Hence, the 3rd respondent Police went to Thiruvananthapuram,
secured accused and produced before the Judicial Magistrate No.I,
Poonamalle. Thereafter, the petitioner agreed to handover the jewels and
valuables of his wife, hence taken to Repco Bank, where opened the bank
locker and handed over all the jewels to defacto complainant. Thus, the 3rd
respondent police conducted the investigation in a free, fair and impartial
manner. The petitioner filed this direction petition seeking direction that the
1st respondent to instruct the 4th respondent to withdraw the Look Out Circular
in Crime No.15 of 2020. At this stage, the present petition is not maintainable
and the same is liable to be dismissed.
8.The learned counsel for the defacto complainant/intervenor submitted
that the removal of the Look Out Circular issued against the petitioner, would
affect the investigation which is being conducted by the 3rd respondent Police.
If the petitioner is permitted to travel back, he will not return back to India.
Hence, the petitioner is very much necessary for investigation in this case and
objected this petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.7978 of 2021
9.Mr.D.Simon, learned Central Government Standing Counsel
appearing for the 4th respondent produced a letter, dated 02.08.2021 of the
Bureau of Immigration (MHA) Government of India, Shastri Bhavan Annexe,
Chennai and the same is as follows:-
“Please refer to your email dated 08.07.2021 on the above
mentioned subject.
The 3rd respondent has not initiated any Look Out
Circular against the petitioner. Immigration authorities act only
on LOC requests made by the various government Law
Enforcement Agencies.
2.It is, therefore, humbly submitted that the Hon'ble High
Court may direct the concerned government agency, under whom
an enquiry/investigation may be pending against the petitioner,
to take a call in this matter.
3.The Hon'ble High Court may please be informed
accordingly for the dismissal of the case since the WP is devoid
of merits and thus render justice.”
10.This Court considered the rival submissions and perused the
materials available on record.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.7978 of 2021
11.It is not in dispute that the petitioner was working as Project
Coordinator in Muscat, Oman from the year 2016. After the marriage with the
defacto complainant, the petitioner continued to work in Muscat, Oman. The
defacto complainant gone to Muscat and stayed with the petitioner for
sometime. The main grievance in the complaint seems to be return of jewels
and valuables presented during the marriage by the family members of the
defacto complainant. It is the admitted case of the defacto complainant that
Sridhana articles were kept in joint locker of the Repco Bank, T.Nagar,
Chennai. After securing the petitioner, the 3rd respondent took him to the bank
where the locker opened and jewels and valuables returned to the defacto
complainant.
12.In a case of matrimonial dispute, the Hon'ble Apex Court by catena
of judgments given guidelines about the manner in which matrimonial cases to
be dealt. In the case of “Rajesh Sharma and others Versus State of Uttar
Pradesh and another reported in (2018) 10 SCC 472” the Hon'ble Apex
Court issued guidelines that 'In respect of persons ordinarily residing out of
India impounding of passports or issuance of Red Corner Notice should not
be a routine. Further, impounding of passport or issuance of red corner
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.7978 of 2021
notice should be avoided'. Admittedly, in this case, there is no allegation
involving physical injuries or death.
13.From the communication of the Bureau of Immigration (MHA)
Government of India, Shastri Bhavan Annexe, Chennai, dated 02.08.2021, it is
seen that no Look Out Circular is pending against the petitioner with the
Immigration Authorities. The 1st respondent admitted that earlier, a request for
Look Out Circular was received on 03.02.2021, based on which the petitioner
was arrested and remanded to judicial custody and later, released on bail, as
such the purpose of Look Out Circular complied and there is no restriction for
the petitioner to fly in and out of India.
14.It could be seen that it is only a matrimonial dispute between the
petitioner and the defacto complainant. Hence, the respondents 1 to 3 are
hereby directed not to request any Look Out Circular against the petitioner
and the 4th respondent not to impose any restriction on the movement of the
petitioner in and out of India, unless it is absolutely necessary. The requisition
and restriction if any should be by a well reasoned one.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.7978 of 2021
15.With the above observation this Criminal Original Petition is
disposed of.
16.The petitioner's movement not to be restricted by any Look Out
Circular, since he is not required for any enquiry by the Police. The 4th
respondent/Immigration Authority submits that no request is made from the
respondents 1 to 3 as on date seeking to issue Look Out Circular against the
petitioner.
07.10.2021
Speaking order/Non-speaking order
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
vv2
To
1.The Deputy Commissioner of Police,
Ambattur District,
Avadi,
Chennai-600 054.
2.The Assistant Director/SIC,
R.K.Puram, Sector-I, BOI Quarters,
East Block VIII, Sec-1,
R.K.Puram,
New Delhi-110 066.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.7978 of 2021
3.The Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Poonamallee Range,
Poonamallee,
Chennai.
4.The Inspector of Police,
W30-All Women Police Station,
Poonamallee,
Chennai.
5.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.7978 of 2021
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
vv2
Crl.O.P.No.7978 of 2021
07.10.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
