Disposed

Madhavapeddy Sri Harsha, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC5 Jun 2018WP/13532/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a look-out circular issued against the petitioner. The court upheld the circular but directed the petitioner to approach the competent court to apply for its recall, urging that court to dispose of the application expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; petitioner directed to move concerned court for recalling look-out circular.

Madhavapeddy Sri Harsha, Vs The State of Andhra… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITON No.13532 of 2018

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

This writ petition is filed challenging the look-out circular

¶4

issued against the petitioner by respondents 2 to 4

¶5

in connection with F.I.R.No.426 of 2017 on the file of Machavaram Police Station, Vijayawada City.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner is cooperating, the charge sheet is not filed and impugned look-out circular was issued on 06-09-2017. Due to issuance of the said circular, the petitioner is unable to travel abroad on his official duty from the Deloitte Company. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner will provide necessary security along with necessary documents to show that he will attend the business work at abroad and to come back to India, if look-out notice is recalled.

¶7

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home produced written instructions stating that investigation is in progress and statements of Lws 1 to 5 were also recorded. It is also stated that in the event of look-out circular is recalled, the petitioner will not be available at the time of requiring his presence in the concerned Court.

¶8

Learned counsel appearing for the 5^th respondent submits that serious charges are leveled against the petitioner and there is every possibility that the petitioner will not return to India, if he is allowed to leave the Country by recalling look-out notice.

¶9

¶10

In this case in the writ affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner wanted to leave abroad on his employer’s business work in the month of May, 2018 itself, but that period is over. It is to be seen that the petitioner can always make application before the concerned Court, which is having jurisdiction to try the case and this Court in WP.No.3213 of 2015 by following the judgments of Madras High Court S.MARTIN v. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND OTHERS¹ and Delhi High Court in SUMER SINGH SALKAN; COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION RE v. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR AND OTHERS; STATE v. GURNEK SINGH ETC.² held that the petitioner is permitted to move the concerned Court for withdrawal of look-out circular by stating the above facts.

¶11

With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to move the concerned Court for recalling of look-out circular by stating the above facts and whenever such application is made, the concerned Court is directed to consider and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possibly by taking the above facts into account while deciding the application. As a sequel to the disposal of this petition, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

¶12

_________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY,J

¶13

05-06-2018

¶14

Note:

¶15

Issue CC by 08-06-2018 B/o Nvl

¶16