Court quashes Look Out Circular against petitioner, imposes travel conditions. Bank can seek legal remedies.

The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, quashing the Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against her. The court highlighted that the LOC should not be used to preemptively enforce a prospective award and that the petitioner's circumstances did not warrant sustaining the LOC. Conditions were imposed for her international travel, requiring her to inform the bank in advance. The bank could still pursue legal remedies through a competent judicial forum for any award. No costs were awarded, and certified copies of the order were provided to the parties upon request.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against petitioner.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against her, contending that her husband had a similar LOC quashed in a previous writ petition. She expressed her desire to join her husband in the UK, emphasizing her qualifications and ability to earn a living there. The petitioner had a history of traveling abroad multiple times, including to the UK, and highlighted her educational background and professional experience. She also mentioned her role as a mother and homemaker, with her minor daughters and parents dependent on her in Kolkata. The respondent-bank justified the LOC issuance based on concerns that the petitioner might evade legal proceedings and awards by relocating to the UK, given her family's presence there. However, the court noted that despite being declared a willful defaulter, no award had been passed against the petitioner by any competent forum. The court emphasized that the LOC should not be used to preemptively enforce a prospective award and that the petitioner's circumstances did not warrant sustaining the LOC, as it could impede her professional career and personal liberty without a valid legal basis.

The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, quashing the LOC issued against her. However, it imposed conditions for her international travel, requiring her to inform the respondent bank in advance about her travel dates and place of residence abroad. The order clarified that the bank could still pursue legal remedies through a competent judicial forum to obtain any award against the petitioner. No costs were awarded, and certified copies of the order were made available to the parties upon request.

---