11.This Court, on the face of the allegations made in the affidavit, was initially of the opinion that there is a grave violation of human right and the petitioner's rights have been deprived by non-application of mind of the authorities. However perusing the records, find that the petitioner herein, who was facing the criminal prosecution for fake insurance claim, had no courtesy to inform the Court, which was trying him for the said offence, about his foreign visits, but conveniently been abstaining himself from participating the trial and the NBW was pending against him for nearly one year. Even after recall of the warrant, he had not been interested in attending the Court and the B-diary extract clearly indicates that there was a calculated attempt by the accused persons to delay the trial. In the said circumstances, the Lookout Circular was issued and the petitioner herein would try to fly abroad had been detained at Bangalore Airport and produced before the Judicial Magistrate. The Judicial Magistrate had rightly allowed the petitioner to go free without remanding him to the judicial custody. This will not give an inference that the police has abused that power. Travel to abroad is not an unrestricted right. More so, when a criminal prosecution is pending and the Emigrant authority is of the view that the person, who wants to go abroad is prima facie satisfied that he has some criminal antecedents, the same has to be verified. Such actions cannot be painted as abuse of power, particularly, in the case of this nature, when already criminal case pending and warrant issued against him which was followed by Lookout Circular, the bonafide discharge of duty by the authorities cannot be termed as abuse of power warranting disciplinary proceedings.
