Lookout circulars and travel liberty: prior notice not required, but disclosure is needed when travel is stopped.

The right to travel abroad was treated as part of personal liberty under Article 21, but lookout circulars were held to be validly issued without prior notice where their purpose is to secure a person's presence for investigation or trial. Fairness, however, requires that when the person is intercepted and travel is stopped, he be informed of the restraint and supplied with the lookout circular then, as a post-decisional opportunity satisfies the minimum requirement of natural justice. On the facts, because the criminal case remained pending and had not been stayed or quashed, a direct recall of the lookout circular was not warranted; the matter was confined to consideration of the representation in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether a subject of a lookout circular is entitled to prior notice before issuance of the circular and to a copy of the circular when his travel is stopped, and whether the petitioner was entitled to recall of the lookout circular or only to consideration of his representation.

Analysis: The right to travel abroad was treated as part of personal liberty protected by Article 21, while the statutory basis for lookout circulars was traced to Sections 10A and 10B of the Passports Act, 1967 and the governing official memoranda. The procedural framework permits issuance of a lookout circular without prior notice where the purpose is to secure the presence of a person for investigation or trial, and prior notice was held not to be a mandatory requirement. At the same time, once the person is intercepted, fairness requires that he be informed of the reason for restraint and furnished the lookout circular then, because a post-decisional opportunity satisfies the minimum requirement of natural justice in such cases. Since the criminal case remained pending and had neither been stayed nor quashed, a direct order recalling the lookout circular was not warranted on the facts.

Conclusion: Prior notice before issuance of the lookout circular was not required, but a copy of the lookout circular had to be supplied when the petitioner was stopped from travelling. The prayer for recall was declined, and the matter was limited to a direction to consider the representation in accordance with law.

---