https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281623 Writ jurisdiction was held available where part of the cause of action arose within the court's territorial limits, because the FIR, Section 41A notice, and the petitioner's residence had a sufficient nexus with Chennai and forum conveniens did not justify refusal. The Look Out Circular was quashed because the governing instructions required cognizable offence-based necessity, deliberate evasion of arrest or appearance, and recorded reasons, none of which were shown when notice to appear had already been issued and no material supported coercive action. The circular was treated as amenable to judicial review due to its adverse civil consequences, while the FIR proceedings themselves were left unaffected. en-us Mon, 23 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Jun 2019 10:25:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281623 Writ jurisdiction was held available where part of the cause of action arose within the court's territorial limits, because the FIR, Section 41A notice, and the petitioner's residence had a sufficient nexus with Chennai and forum conveniens did not justify refusal. The Look Out Circular was quashed because the governing instructions required cognizable offence-based necessity, deliberate evasion of arrest or appearance, and recorded reasons, none of which were shown when notice to appear had already been issued and no material supported coercive action. The circular was treated as amenable to judicial review due to its adverse civil consequences, while the FIR proceedings themselves were left unaffected. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 23 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281623