High CourtsSingle Bench(2021) 02 KL CK 0088

Aneesh Therakathu Vijayan vs Union Of India And Ors

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 24 February 2021

HON’BLE JUDGES
V.G. Arun, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) No. 4507 Of 2021

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

19 paragraphs · 395 words
1.

Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.62/2017 of Irikkur Police Station, now pending as C.C.No.2003/2020 on the files of Judicial First Class

Magistrate Court-II, Kannur. The Crime has been registered alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 354A, 354D, 506 and 509 of

IPC, Sections 119(b) and 120(o) of the Kerala Police Act and Sections 66(C) and 66(E) of the Information Technology Act.

2.

As C.C.No.2003 of 2020 was not being listed due to the cause list being restricted in the light of the lockdown restrictions, the petitioner filed an

application under Section 205 of Cr.P.C., to exempt him from personal appearance before the court, as he was desirous of taking up employment

abroad. The application was allowed as per Ext.P6 proceedings dated 19.1.2021 and the case was posted to 18.5.2021. Thereupon, the petitioner

obtained Exhibit P8 flight ticket and reached the Airport on 16.2.2021 for travelling to Sharjah (UAE). But, the petitioner was detained at the

Emigration Counter and handed over to the Valiyathura Police for the reason of the Look Out Circular (LOC) pending against him.

3.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner drew attention to Ext.P12 communication issued by the District Police Chief, Kannur to the Joint Deputy

Director/SIC, Bureau of Emigration, stating that the petitioner, against whom an LOC has been issued, has obtained bail in Crime No.62/2017 of

Irikkur Police Station and therefore, further action based on the LOC need not be continued and that, action may be taken to cancel the LOC. It is

contended that the originating authority, viz., the jurisdictional Police having requested to withdraw the LOC and the jurisdictional court having

exempted the petitioner form personal appearance, the emigration authorities have absolutely no power to detain the petitioner and prevent him from

travelling abroad.

4.

Heard the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned Central Government Counsel also.

5.

I find substance in the contention that in the light of Ext.P12 request made by the Police and the exemption granted by the jurisdictional court, the

LOC is not valid any longer and the petitioner cannot be detained at the Airport or prevented from travelling abroad on the strength of the LOC.

Hence, the writ petition is allowed. It is directed that the petitioner shall not be prevented from travelling abroad based on the LOC issued in

connection with Crime No.62 of 2017 of Irikkur Police Station.