Look Out Circulars may be sustained for serious economic offences where departure threatens public interest and judicial review is limited.

A Look Out Circular was sustained because the petitioner's claim of diplomatic immunity failed; he was not accredited to India and did not qualify as a diplomatic agent under the Vienna Convention. The guidelines were applied to permit issuance of a Look Out Circular in exceptional cases where departure may be refused in larger public interest, and the ongoing investigation into a serious economic offence justified the restriction. Judicial review was limited to the decision-making process and did not extend to reassessing the sufficiency of investigative material. The right to travel was treated as not absolute, and the request to leave India was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Look Out Circular issued against the petitioner was liable to be quashed and he permitted to leave India.

Analysis: The petitioner's plea of diplomatic immunity was rejected because he was not accredited to India and did not answer the description of a diplomatic agent protected under the Vienna Convention. The guidelines governing Look Out Circulars were held to permit issuance in exceptional cases where departure may be declined in larger public interest, and the material placed by the investigating agencies showed an ongoing investigation into a serious economic offence. The scope of judicial review was held to be confined to the decision-making process, not the sufficiency of the investigative material, and the right to travel was held not to be absolute.

Conclusion: The Look Out Circular was upheld and the request to permit the petitioner to go abroad was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition failed on merits, and the impugned restriction on the petitioner's departure from India was sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: A Look Out Circular may be sustained where credible investigative material discloses a serious offence and departure is considered contrary to public interest, and judicial review will not reassess the sufficiency of that material on merits.

---