Look Out Circulars in ongoing investigations will not be quashed absent mala fides, abuse of process, or lack of jurisdiction.

A Look Out Circular issued during an ongoing Prevention of Money Laundering Act investigation was upheld where the record indicated non-cooperation, failure to furnish documents, and a risk of the person leaving the country. The Court reiterated that constitutional courts should exercise restraint in interfering with criminal investigations unless there is clear abuse of process, mala fides, or patent lack of jurisdiction. It also accepted that the issuing authority had statutory sanction and jurisdiction, and distinguished the cited precedent on its facts. The challenge to the Look Out Circular therefore failed, and the appeal was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Look Out Circular issued against the appellant was liable to be quashed on the ground of cooperation with investigation, absence of sufficient cause, and want of jurisdiction.

Analysis: The writ appeal concerned challenge to a Look Out Circular issued during an ongoing investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The Court held that constitutional courts must exercise restraint in matters of criminal investigation unless there is clear abuse of process, mala fides, or patent want of jurisdiction. It noted that the counter affidavit disclosed material suggesting non-cooperation, failure to furnish documents, and a possibility of the appellant leaving the country, while the reply affidavit did not specifically controvert the core allegations. The Court also accepted the view that the authority had statutory sanction and jurisdiction to issue the Look Out Circular, and distinguished the cited precedent on its facts.

Conclusion: The Look Out Circular was upheld and the challenge to it failed; the appeal was dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: A Look Out Circular issued during an ongoing investigation will not be quashed merely because the person concerned claims cooperation, unless the action is shown to be a clear abuse of process, mala fide, or without jurisdiction, especially where material indicates possible evasion or non-cooperation.

---