S G Shankar, E.Godavari Dist Vs the State of Telangana, Hyderabad and 5 Others

¶1

13217 1

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 26571 OF 2017

¶7

Between

¶8

Seelam Gouri Shankar, S/o. S.Suryanarayana, Aged about 32 years, Occ Bank Employee, o. Door No.70-7-66(D1, Thota Subbaraonagar, Ramanaiahpeta, Kakinada, East Godavari District, Presently residing at Apartment and Chambers 8-12, Crown Street, Halifax, U.K.

¶9

...pETlTlONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State Of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Commissioner of Police, Police Commissionerate, Hyderabad

¶13

The lnspector of Police, KPHB Police Station, Cyberabad.

¶14

The Station House Officer, PS KPHB Colony, Cyberabad.

¶15

The Nodal Officer, Bureau of lmmigration,^Rajeev Gandhi^{lnternational} Airport, Shamshabad, Hyderabad.

¶16

Seelam Avanthika, D/o. K.Satyanarayana, Aged about 26^years, Occ Housewife, Ri/o. Flat No.4018, Sri hilarsha Residency, Phase^- 5,^KPHB Colony, Hyderabad.

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Arlicle 226 of the Constitution of lndia^praying that in^the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the^High Court^{may be} pleased to issue writ, order or direction more particularly ore in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents^{4 and 5 in issuing Lookout} Circular against the^petitioner herein in Connection Crime^No.426 of^{2016 as} against the guidelines dated¹¹ .8.2010^for lookout circular^{which was issuedby} the Central Government, Ministry of Home Affairs and not^issuing any^papers relating in respect of LOC and without following due^process of law, as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the law and violative of^principles of natural^justiceand consequently direct the respondents 4 and 5 to^{remove the LookoutCircular} against the^petitioner herein.

¶19

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP. NO: 32 971 0F 20171

¶20

Petition under section^,151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in srrpport of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the respondents 4 and 5 to remove Lookout circular against the petitioner herein, pending disposal of above writ petition.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt CHtNTAPALL| SRIN|VAS (NOT pRESENT) Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 TO 4: SRI D.PRADEEP, AGp FOR HOii4E Counsel for the Respondent Nos.s & 6: -

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶24

WRIT PETITION No. 26571 OF 2017

¶25

ORDER

¶26

This Writ Petition is filed under^{Article 226 of the Constitution of} lndia seeking the following relief

¶27

"...to issue writ, order or direction more^pafticularly one in the nature of wit of Mandamus declaring^{the action of the respondents} 4 and 5 in issuing Lookout Circular^{against the petitioner herein in} connection Crime No. 426 of^{2016 as against the guidelines} dated 11.8.2010 for^{tookout circular, which was issued by the} Central Government, Ministry of^{HomeAffairs and not issuing any} papers relating in respect of LOC and^{without followingdue} process of law, as arbitrary, illegal and contrary^{to the lawand} violative of principles of natural iustice^{and consequently directthe} respondents 4 and 5 to remove^{the Lookout Circular againstthe} petitioner herein and to pass such other order^{or orders..."}

¶28

2 None appeared on behalf of^{the petitioner}

¶29

tVlr. D. Pradeep, learned^{Assistant Government Pleaderfor Home,} appearing for respondent^{Nos.'l to 4, submits that CrimeNo. 426of 2016} culminaled in calendar^{case No. 1926 0t 2019 0n the file of the learnedll} Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XlX^{MetropolitanMagistrate,} Kukatpally, at Miyapur, Cyberabad.^{However, during the pendency of the} trial proceedings, the^{parties amicably settled the matter before the Lok} Adalat, and the offences^{were compounded by the trial Courtby ardel} dated 12.07.2019.^Accordingly, it is^{submitted that the petitioner's}

¶30

2

¶31

contention^{regardingthe issuanceof a LookoutCircular (LOC) no longer} survives for^{consideration. and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed}

¶32

lhave^{perused the materialavailable on record}

¶33

The grievance^{of the petitioneris that respondent} Nos. 4 and 5 issued a Lookout^{Circular (LOC) againsthim without} any^legal justification. However. as reported by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for^{Home, the underlyingcriminal proceedingsin Crime No. 426} of 2016 have^{since been settled betweenthe parties,} and the corresponding^{Calendar CaseNo. 1926 of 2019has been disposed} of in terms of the^{compromise recorded beforethe Lok Adalat, wherein} the offences were dulY^comPounded

¶34

ln view of the^{said development,} it is evident that the Lookout Circular, whrch was issued as a consequential measure during the pendency of the criminal proceedings, has lost its relevance upon the conclusion of those proceedings. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered view that nothing further survives for adjudication in this writ petition.

¶35

t

¶36

J

¶37