TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 1511
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s that lead to this Court in the subject petition, as borne out from the pleadings, are as follows:- Petitioner and his wife Smt. Navya Bhat got married on 8.04.2009. After about 10 years of marriage a petition is filed by Smt. Navya Bhat under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 89 of 2019 pending before the V Additional Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic Court. Smt. Navya Bhat later seeks custody of the child by initiating proceedings under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 in G & WC No. 309 of 2019. The petitioner claims to be in dispute with Smt. Navya Bhat and is a respondent in the aforesaid two cases. 4. Things standing thus, Smt. Navya Bhat, the wife registers a complaint before the jurisdictional Police alleging that the petitioner has sexually abused his son which becomes a crime in Crime No. 145 of 2021 for offences punishable under Sections 376AB of the IPC and Section 3(a), 3(b), 5(m), 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ('POCSO Act' for short). Pursuant to said registration of crime, the petitioner was taken into custody and after about 2 months was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Union of India defending execution of LOC. The Assistant Solicitor General of India Sri. H.Shanthi Bhushan would contend that the Bureau of Immigration which executes LOC has no role to play, as the originator is the State Government; the 4th respondent in the case at hand. He has placed on record all the circulars/official memoranda that are operating with regard to Lookout Circulars. 7. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and perused the material on record. 8. The issue in the case at hand is not with regard to merit of cases pending between the petitioner and his wife. The issue is with regard to restriction on travel of the petitioner beyond the shores of this nation on the strength of a LOC. LOC issued by Government of India is required to be noticed for a resolution of the lis. Before considering the issue, it is germane to notice the protagonist that would come about in the execution of LOC. LOC is issued by the Police or the Court in some circumstances. Therefore, they are referred as the originator. LOC is transmitted to the Bureau of Immigration to execute the said LOC and the person against whom LOC is iss....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cer shall make a written request for LOC to the officer as notified by the circular of Ministry of Home Affairs, giving details & reasons for seeking LOC. The competent officer alone shall give directions for opening LOC by passing an order in this respect. c) The person against whom LOC is issued must join investigation by appearing before I.O. or should surrender before the court concerned or should satisfy the court that LOC was wrongly issued against him. He may also approach the officer who ordered issuance of LOC & explain that LOC was wrongly issued against him. LOC can be withdrawn by the authority that issued and can also be rescinded by the trial court where case is pending or having jurisdiction over concerned police station on an application by the person concerned. d) LOC is a coercive measure to make a person surrender to the investigating agency or Court of law. The subordinate courts' jurisdiction in affirming or cancelling LOC is commensurate with the jurisdiction of cancellation of NBWs or affirming NBWs." (Emphasis supplied) In terms of paragraph-7(a) of the Official Memorandum recourse to LOC can be taken by the investigating agency i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....11-26192883, email:[email protected]) in the enclosed Proforma. (B) The request for opening of LOC must invariably be issued with the approval of an Originating Agency that shall be an officer not below the rank of- (i) Deputy Secretary to the Government of India; or (ii) Joint Secretary in the State Government; or (iii) District Magistrate of the District concerned; or (iv) Superintendent of Police (SP) of the District concerned; or (v) SP in CBI or an officer of equivalent level working in CBI; or (vi) Zonal Director in Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) or an officer of equivalent level [including Assistant Director (Ops.) in Headquarters of NCB); or (vii) Deputy Commissioner or an officer of equivalent level in the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence or Central Board of Direct Taxes or Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs; or (viii) Assistant Director of Intelligence Bureau/Bureau of Immigration (BOI); or (ix) Deputy Secretary of Research and Analysis Wing (R & AW); or (x) An officer not below the level of Superintendent of Police in National Investigation Agency; or (xi) A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lso be included in the request for opening LOC. (G) The legal liability of the action taken by the immigration authorities in pursuance of the LOC rests with the originating agency (H) Recourse to LOC is to be taken in cognizable offences under IPC or other penal laws. The details in column IV in the enclosed Proforma regarding 'reason for opening LOC' must invariably be provided without which the subject of an LOC will not be arrested/detained. (I) In cases where there is no cognizable offence under IPC and other penal laws, the LOC subject cannot be detained/arrested or prevented from leaving the country. The Originating Agency can only request that they be informed about the arrival/departure of the subject in such cases. (J) The LOC opened shall remain in force until and unless a deletion request is received by Bol from the Originator itself. No LOC shall be deleted automatically. Originating Agency must keep reviewing the LOCs opened at its behest on quarterly and annual basis and submit the proposals to delete the LOC. if any, immediately after such a review. The BOI should contact the LOC Originators through normal channels a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e (B) above. (N) For effective and better interception of LOC subjects, following guidelines shall be followed by the Originator:- (i) Specific action to be taken by the Immigration authorities on detection must be indicated in the filled LOC proforma. (ii) In case of any change in parameters/actions/ investigating officer/Originator contact details or if any court order is passed in the case, the same should be brought to the notice of the BoI immediately by the originating agency concerned for making necessary changes in the LOC. (iii) For LOCs originated on court orders, the concerned PS/IO should send the identifying parameters of the subject to the BoI as court orders contain only name and parentage of the subject./ (iv) In case an LOC is challenged and stayed by the concerned court or a court issues any directive with regard to the LOC, the Originator must inform the BoI urgently and accordingly seek amendment/deletion of the LOC.. (v) Whenever the subject of LOC is arrested or the purpose of the LOC is over, a deletion request shall be sent by the Originator immediately to the BoI. (vi) The Originator must ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eptable, as the frame work of LOC itself bars such notice to be issued. Above all, this very contention is urged before a Division Bench of this Court in Dr. BAVAGUTHURAGHURAM SHETTY v. BUREAU OF IMMIGRATIOIN, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI ILR 2021 KAR 2963 wherein this Court answered a specific contention which was urged as follows: "14.7 He would submit that learned single Judge erred in opining that petitioner ought to have been issued "prior notice" as it would defeat the purpose of LOC, inasmuch as, it is the specific case of the petitioner that after issuance of LOC petitioner ought to have been notified so as to enable the petitioner to exercise his available legal remedies and it is this violation of right which had been canvassed before the learned single Judge, but was not considered. Hence, he prays for allowing the writ appeal by setting aside the order of learned single Judge and consequently prays for allowing the writ petition...................." (Emphasis supplied) The answer to the contention by the Division Bench is as follows: 22. It is the specific act emerging from the said OMs, which the petitioner seeks to assail in the wr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....if the right is extended to comprehended an extraneous facility. But such extensions do not form part of the right conferred by the Constitution. The analogy of the freedom of press being included in the right of free speech and expression 4-119SCI/78 is wholly misplaced because the right of free expression incontrovertibly includes the right of freedom of the press. The right to, go abroad on one hand and the right of free speech and expression on the other are made up of basically different constituents, so different indeed that one cannot be comprehended in the other. 55. Brother Bhagwati has, on this aspect considered at length certain American decisions like Kent(1), Apthekar(2) and Zemel(3) and illuminating though his analysis is, I am inclined to think that the presence of the due process clause in the 5th and 14th Amendments of the American Constitution makes significant difference to the approach of American Judges to the definition and evaluation of constitutional guarantees. The content which has been meaningfully and imaginatively poured into "due process of law" may, in my view, constitute an important point of distinction between the American Constitution and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nths from the date of the fresh decision, if the decision was adverse to the petitioner. The order, I agree, does not in fact offend against article 19 (1) (a) or 19 (1) (g). 23. It has also been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court (per Hon'ble the Chief Justice-Mr. Beg and per Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kailasam) that a passport may be impounded without giving prior opportunity and subsequently hearing must be provided. Hence, petitioner cannot be heard to contend that his right of hearing has been taken away and thereby act of the respondents are hit by Article 14 of the Constitution. 24. In the instant case, we notice that the extant OMs provide for an opportunity to the petitioner namely, the petitioner being entitled to appear before the third and fourth respondent-Banks and explain the circumstances which perforced the Banks for issuing LOC was not prevailing and both the Banks are required to examine, consider and then pass an order on the said plea. Though Sri. Mukul Rohatgi has made an attempt to contend that post decisional hearing is an empty formality we are not inclined to accept the same, inasmuch as, Hon'ble Apex Court in MANEKA GANDHIs case, ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s sought to be supported by reference to the statement of the law in A.S. de Smith, Judicial Review of Administrative Action, 2nd ed., where the learned author says at page 174 that "in administrative, law a prima facie right to prior notice and opportunity to be heard may be held to be excluded by implication-where an obligation to give notice and opportunity to be heard would obstruct the taking of prompt action, especially action of a preventive or remedial nature". Now, it is true that since the right to prior notice and opportunity of hearing arises only by implication from the duty to act fairly, or to use the words of Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest, from 'fair play in action, it may equally be excluded where, having regard to the nature of the action to be taken, its object and purpose and the scheme of the relevant statutory provision, fairness in action does not demand its implication and even warrants its exclusion. There are certain well recognised exceptions to the audi alteram partem rule established by judicial decisions and they are summarised by S.A. de Smith in Judicial Review of Administrative Action, 2nd ed., at page 168 to 179. If we analyse these exceptions a ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... That is why Tucker, L.J., emphasised in Russel v. Duke of Norfolk, that "whatever standard of natural justice is adopted, one essential is that the person concerned should have a reasonable opportunity of presenting his case". What opportunity may be regarded as reasonable would necessarily depend on the practical necessities of the situation. It may be a sophisticated full fledged hearing or it may be a hearing which is very brief and minimal : it may be a hearing prior to the decision or it may even be a post-decisional remedial hearing. The audi alteram partem rule is sufficiently flexible to permit modifications and variations to suit the exigencies of myriad kinds of situations which max, arise. This circumstantial flexibility of the audi alteram partem rule was emphasised by Lord Reid in Wiseman v. Someman, (supra) when he said that he would be "sorry to see this fundamental general principle degenerate into a series of hard and fast rules" and Lord Hailsham, L.C., also observed in Pearl-Berg v. Party that the courts "have taken in increasingly sophisticated view of what is required in individual cases". It would not, therefore, be right to conclude that the audi alteram par....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of Art. 21 of the Constitution and is in accordance with the procedure established by law. I construe section 10(3) (c) as providing a right to the holder of the passport to be heard before the passport authority and that any order passed under section 10(3) is subject to a limited judicial scrutiny by the, High Court and the Supreme Court." Hence, the contention raised by Sri. Mukul Rohatgi, Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner that subsequent hearing of the petitioner would be an empty formality or in other words, such post decisional hearing is impermissible cannot be accepted. However, it is needless to state that notwithstanding the conclusion arrived at by respondent nos. 3 and 4 for issuance of LOC against the petitioner, prayer of the petitioner for revoking the same shall be considered independently and without being influenced by any conclusion already arrived by them and without being influenced by any observations made either by the Learned Single Judge or by this Court." (Emphasis supplied) Therefore, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that a notice ought to be issued to the subject of the LOC prior to issuance of LO....