Allowed

Mohd Abdul Khaleel v. The State Of Telangana

Telangana HC7 Feb 2024WP/3063/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought cancellation of a Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against him in a criminal case. The Magistrate had already cancelled the LOC subject to conditions, but the Immigration Officer continued to restrict travel. The High Court directed the Immigration Authority to permit travel subject to compliance with the Magistrate's order.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Immigration Officer to permit the petitioner to travel abroad subject to complying with the conditions imposed by the XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in the order dated 20.10.

Mohd Abdul Khaleel Vs The State Of Telangana — Bail and Remand | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^32s6 ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C. V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 3063 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

MOHD ABD_UL KHALEEL, S/o . MOHD PASHA, Aged 36 years, Occ pvt Employee..,R/af No_ 17-1-375tN21, Khahnder Nager Santosh Nager, Saidabad Hyderabad, Telangana Presently Residing At Ft.trto. Level 7, Dai Ai Akran Tow.er, -Biya9!, Saud-i Arabia_ ., Hepresent6d By His GpA Mr,Mohd Khadeer S/O. Mohd Pasha Aged 34 Years, Occ pvt Emftoyee ,R/O.H No 171-3751N2'l, Khalander Nager Santosh Nager, Saidibad Hyderabad, Telangana'

¶9

AND

¶10

..pETrroNER

¶11

The.State Of Telangana, Represented By lts principal Secretary, Department Of Home, Secretariat Buildinqs. Hvderab'ad.

¶12

The lnspector Of Police, PS W.P.S South Zone. Charminar. Hvderabad

¶13

The lmmigration Officer, lmmigration Authority Of lndia, Rajiv Gandhi lnternational Airport, Shamshabad, Hvderabad.

¶14

Smt. Shireen Ghazala, WO Mohamnied Abdul Khaleel, Aged 31 years, Occ Housewife, R/o Komath. No 22-2- 1 34 t3, Wad i, Dabeerp r 15, HIIF[BBXto.nr"

¶15

Petition under Article 226 ol the Constitution of India praying that in ttre circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order, or directiorf, particularly in the nature of the Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 for not deleting the LOC even after Petitioner has executed his personal bond for Rs. 2,00,000/- bearing No.742040 and Rs.4,00,000/- bearing no. 689442 Considering the executed personal bond and the conditions laid down by the court, as mentioned in the Order of THE. COURT OF THE XV ADDL, CHTEF METROPOLTTAN MAGISTRATE AT HYDERABAD iN CrI.P.NO.lO7il2022 dI 2OI1OI2O22 iN CC.No.5952 OF 2024 of P.S WPS South Zone, Hyderabad as illegat, arbitrary, and further direct the Respondent No.2 to suspend the Loc and not to arrest the petitioner at the airport in lQht of the executed persooal bond and the court,s order, continued initiation of LOC proceedings would be unjust and prejudicial to the petitioner's rights

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No.2 to suspend the LOC and not to arrest the petitioner at the airport in light of the executed personal bond and the courts order, continued initiation of LOC proceedings would be unjust and prejudicial to the petitioner's rights

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI MD FASIUDDIN

¶19

Counsel for Respondent Nos. 'l to 3: AGP FOR HOIUIE

¶20

Counsel for Respondent No. 4: ---

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

¶23

THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3O63 of 2o23

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution

¶26

of India, is frled seeking the following relief:

¶27

"...to issue \trrit, order or direction more particularty in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent No.2 in not deteting the LOC even after p€titioner has executed his personal bond for Rs.2,O0,OOO/- bearing No.74204O and Rs.4,00,0O0/- bearing No.689442 considering the executed personal bond and the conditions laid down by ttre Court, as mentioned in the order of the Court of the XV Additional Chief Metropotitan Magistrate at Hyderabad in Crl.P.No. l07I of 2022, dated, 20.10.2022 in c.c.No.5952 0f 2024 0f P.S.^WPS South ne, Hyderabad, as illegal, arbitrary and further direct respondent No.2 to suspend the LOC and not to arrest^the petitioner at the airport in the light of the executed^persona-l bond arld the Court's order, continued initiation of^LOC proceedings would be unjust and prejudicial to the petition€r's rights..."

¶28

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Iearned Assistalt Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and perused the record.

¶29

The petitioner stated that he is accused No.l in Crime No.185 of 2022 on the file of Women Police Station, South Zone, Hyderabad, registered for the offences^punishable under Sections 498-A and 506 IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of^the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, and aJter completion of investigation, charge sheet has been laid a€ainst the accused Dersons urde C.C.No.5952 of 2022 on the frle of Court of XV {.-

¶30

¶31

Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. It is the case of the petitioner that pending trial in the said Calendar Case, the petitioner liled Crl.M.P.No.1322 of 2022 in C.C.No.5952 of 2022 in Crime No.185 of 2022 before the Court below seeking to cancel the Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against him by respondent No.3-Immigration Department. The Court below by an order, dated 20.10.2022, aJlowed the said application cancelling the LOC issued against the petitioner and the operative portion of the said order reads as under:

¶32

'In the result, tJ:e petition is allowed and accordingly the LOC issued by the Imrnigration Department in CC No.5952 of 2022 in Crime No.185 of 2022 of WPS, South 7ane, Hyderabad, is hereby cancelled on the following conditions :

¶33

(r) The petitioner should appear before this Court on each and every adjoumment and cooperate for speedy disposal of the case.

¶34

(ii) The petitioner should obtain prior permission of the Court whenever he intends to travel abroad.

¶35

(iii) If the petitioner/Al deviates from the above conditions, his LOC will be initiated without any prior notice."

¶36

The grievance of the petitioner is that even after

¶37

cancellation of the LOC and even after duly complJring with the conditions mentioned in the said order dated 2O.1O.2O22 by the petitioner, respondent No.3 is not allowing the petitioner to

travel abroad.

-,-

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, would submit that the information relating to IN cancellation of the LOC issued against the petitioner relation to C.C.No.5952 of 2022 was communicated to respondent No.3 on 05.O2.2024.

¶43

In view of the said submissions, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition directing respondent No.3 to permit the petitioner to travel abroad subject to petitioner complying with the conditions imposed in the order, dated 20.10.2022 passed by the learned XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad Crl.M.P.No. 1322 of 2022 in C.C.No.5952 of 2022.

¶44

With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶45

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ

¶46

petition shall stand closed.

¶47

SD'. K.SREERAMA^MURTY - ASSISTANT REGI$TRAR

¶48

//TRUE COPY/I i sEcnoN 6ir,"=*

¶49

To, 1 The lmmioration Offrcer,^{I mmigration' Authority.Of lndia' RajivGandhi} tniernatioiat Airport,^{Shamshabad, Hyderabad'} 2. ili"J'iCiij sii'iifa^{FbiirooinAdvocat6} toPuc] - - 3 Two ccs to^{Gp For nome, iiiil'i.l'6o,irt ioitte'state of Telangana. [oUT]} 4. Two CD CoPies

¶50

MBC

¶51

LS g

I /

CC TODAY

HIGH COURT

DATED: 07t02t2024

1 E S TAr6
(
Q
F r B 2021 Z
-,1,
.+'
{.
C o +.
C

¶58

ORDER

¶59

WP.No.3063 of 2024

¶60

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶61

cpenl
@

¶62

WTHOUT COSTS

Mohd Abdul Khaleel v. The State Of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Abdul Khaleel v. The State Of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M. Rajeshwar Rao Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Mohammed Sami Khan Vs The State of Telangana

Gulam Aijaz Vs The State of Telangana

Mr. Katkuri Laxma Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. B. Lavanya Vs The state of Telangana

Syed Ashwak Vs The State of Telangana