Madras High Court
Sheik Uduma vs The Chief Immigration Officer on 12 August, 2024
Author: N.Sathish Kumar
Bench: N.Sathish Kumar
W.P.(MD)N.19223 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 12.08.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
W.P.(MD)No.19223 of 2024
Sheik Uduma ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Chief Immigration Officer,
No.26, Sasthiri Bhavan,
Haddows Road, Nungambakkam,
Chennai-6.
2.The Superintendent of Police,
Tenkasi District.
3. The Inspector of Police,
Kadayanallur Police Station,
Tenkasi District. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents, more
particularly the respondents 2 & 3 to withdraw the lookout circular
issued on 02.01.2024 against the petitioner in Crime No.239 of 2023 on
the file of the 3rd respondent by considering the representation dated
26.07.2024 within the time frame fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Venkatesh
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
W.P.(MD)N.19223 of 2024
For R1 : Mr.K.Govindarajan
Deputy Solicitor General of India
For R2 & R3 : Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi
Government Advocate (Criminal side)
ORDER
With consent of the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for
final disposal at the admission stage itself.
2. Heard both sides.
3. Challenging the Look Out Circular issued on 02.01.2024
against the petitioner in Crime No.239 of 2023 on the file of the 3rd
respondent, the petitioner is before this Court with this writ petition.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that on 22.06.2023, an FIR has
been registered in Crime No.239 of 2023 for the offence under Sections
147, 148, 294(b), 341, 323, 364, 386, 109 & 506(ii) IPC, based on the
complaint given by one Abdul Wahab. The petitioner was working as
Cleaning Supervisor, Emrill Services LLC at Dubai by obtaining resident
Visa which was issued on 04.05.2022 and valid till 03.05.2025. Even at
the time of the alleged occurrence, he was in Dubai. The 3rd respondent
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)N.19223 of 2024
made a request to the second respondent for issuing a Look Out Circular
and hence, the 2nd respondent forwarded the same to the 1st respondent.
Accordingly, the Look Out Circular was issued on 02.01.2024. Based on
that, on the arrival of the petitioner at Tiruvendram Airport, he was
arrested on 24.06.2024 and later he was released on bail on 12.07.2024.
Hence, the petitioner has made a request to cancel the Lookout Circular
and seeks a direction from this Court by way of filing this writ petition.
5. The factum of the arrest of the petitioner is not in dispute. In
an earlier occasion, in a similar case filed by the similarly placed person
in W.P.No.14724 of 2021, this Court, vide order dated 04.04.2022, has
held as follows:
“13. In Arockia Jeyabalan Vs. The Regional Passport Officer
reported in 2014 (4) LW 841 this Court held as under:-
"11.Therefore, it is clear that the only reason for
the police making a request to the Bureau of
Immigration to issue a Look Out Circular against the
petitioner was the registration of a complaint against
him and his non availability for interrogation. The
purpose of issue of the Look Out Circular now stands
served, with the interception of the petitioner at the
Bangalore Airport on 31.1.2014 and his arrest and
detention to judicial custody. The petitioner has now
come out on bail and has also complied with the bail
conditions. 12.The object of a Look Out Circular is to
ensure that a person is available for interrogation or
trial or enquiry. Now that the Court has released him
on bail subject to certain conditions as well as
sureties, the apprehension that the petitioner may not
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)N.19223 of 2024
make himself available and amenable to law, has
gone. 13.Therefore, W.P.No.22205 of 2014 is allowed
and the Look Out Circular is quashed, in as much as
the purpose of issuing the same has now been served
and the petitioner has subjected himself to the long
arm of the law."
14. Further, this Court in E.V.Perumal Samy Reddy and Ors.
Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Police and another reported in
2013 (2) LW (crl) 628 has held as under :-
"9.It is basic that merely because a person is involved
in a criminal case, he is not denude of his fundamental
rights. It is the fundamental of a person to move anywhere
he likes including foreign countries. One's such personal
freedom and liberty cannot be abridged. In the celebrated
in MENAKA GANDHI Vs. UNION OF INDIA [AIR 1978
SC 597], the Hon'ble Supreme Court upheld the
constitutional right of persons to go abroad. The phrase
no one shall be deprived of his ''life and liberty'' except
procedure established by law employed in Article 21, had
deep and pervasive effect on fundamental right and
human right. MENAKA GANDHI (supra) ushered a new
era in the annals of Indian Human Rights Law. It had
gone ahead of American concept of 'Due Process of
Law.”
6. The above findings is squarely applicable to the case of the
writ petitioner. Since the writ petitioner has already been secured on the
basis of the Look Out Circular and released on bail later and also the
offence registered against him is not serious offence, the respondents 2
& 3 are directed to withdraw the Look Out Circular issued against the
petitioner in connection with Crime No.239 of 2023, in the light of the
above judgment and pass appropriate orders within a period of one
month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)N.19223 of 2024
7. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of.
No Costs.
12.08.2024
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
PJL
To
1. The Chief Immigration Officer,
No.26, Sasthiri Bhavan,
Haddows Road, Nungambakkam,
Chennai-6.
2.The Superintendent of Police,
Tenkasi District.
3. The Inspector of Police,
Kadayanallur Police Station,
Tenkasi District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)N.19223 of 2024
N.SATHISH KUMAR , J.
PJL
12.08.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
