Bobbili Akhila vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.

Aggrieved by the action of respondents in issuing and continuing Look-Out Circular bearing C.No.6074/C3/CCRB/2024 against the petitioner and preventing her from travelling abroad for pursuing higher education in United Kingdom, the present writ petition has been filed.

Heard Sri Nagurbabu Nurbhasha, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri A.Ravindra Babu, learned Central Government Counsel and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home Department.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit, contended that without issuing any prior notice, the respondent authorities have issued/continued a Look-Out Circular (LOC) against the petitioner on the ground of the pendency of Crime No.162 of 2024 of Duvvada Police Station, Visakhapatnam City, registered on 26.04.2024 for the offence punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. He further submitted that the petitioner has cooperated with the investigation, complied with the notice issued under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, corresponding to Section 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and appeared before the Investigating Officer whenever required. The petitioner has never evaded the process of law. No charge-sheet/final report has been filed till date. He further submitted that the issuance/continuation of the Look-Out Circular against the petitioner, without prior notice, without affording an opportunity of hearing, without periodic review, and without considering the petitioner’s confirmed admission to a foreign university, scholarship, valid visa, and travel tickets, is unconstitutional. Hence, prayed to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to travel abroad and pursue her higher studies.

On the other hand, learned Central Government Counsel and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home Department, submitted that the petitioner, without first approaching the Originating Agency seeking withdrawal/cancellation of the Look-Out Circular, has straightaway invoked the jurisdiction of this Court. They further contended that, in view of the availability of an alternative remedy, the present writ petition is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. Hence, prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition.

Perused the material available on record and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

There is no dispute with regard to the registration of Crime No.162 of 2024 of Duvvada Police Station for the for the offence punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the IPC, which is pending against the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is with regard to the continuation of the Look-Out Circular issued in connection with the said crime. It is the specific contention of the respondents that the petitioner has not approached the competent authority seeking withdrawal/cancellation of the Look-Out Circular before invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

There is some force in the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents that, ordinarily, the aggrieved person should first approach the authority competent to consider the grievance before invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. In a petition seeking a writ of mandamus, the petitioner is ordinarily required to demonstrate that a specific request or representation has been made to the competent authority and that the authority has failed or refused to consider the same. To entertain a Writ of Mandamus, it is a pre-condition that the aggrieved person should have approached the authorities competent against whom such a direction is sought for. The said representation/appeal acknowledged by the authorities competent must be available in the file of the authorities concerned. In the present case, admittedly, the petitioner has not approached the Originating Agency, which is the competent authority for seeking withdrawal/cancellation of the Look-Out Circular, by submitting an appropriate representation before invoking the jurisdiction of this Court.

In view of the above, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of matter, is inclined to dispose of the writ petition at the stage of admission itself, with the following directions:

Accordingly, the Writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any in the writ petition, shall also stand closed.