Telangana High Court
Bhagyalakshmi Sankar vs Union Of India on 6 April, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT
HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA
WRIT PETITION NO.14629of 2025
THE 06th DAY OF APRIL, 2026
Between:
Bhagyalakshmi Sankar
...Petitioner
AND
Union of India and Government of India and 6 others
...Respondents
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:
"... to issue a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4thRespondent in issuing the communication to Respondents Nos.1 to 3 for opening a Look Out Circular against the petitioner without any probable cause as arbitrary, illegal and unjustified and consequently, direct the respondents to revoke/withdraw the Look Out Circular issued against the petitioner and ....."
2. Heard Sri T. Jayant Jaisoorya, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri M Vijay Kumar, learned Senior Counsel for Central Government appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondent Nos.4 to 7.
RY,J W.P_14629_2025
3. The case of the petitioner is that a false report was lodged against her by one Jagadesh Kumar on 23.11.2024 before P.S., CCS and based on said false report, the P.S., CCS registered a crime in FIR No.233 of 2024. The petitioner approached this court under Section 528 of BNSS vide Criminal Petition No. 14556 of 2024 dated 27.11.2024. This court had issued notice to respondent No.4. The petitioner informed about Crl.P.No.14556 of 2024 to respondent No.4 through a WhatsApp message. The petitioner called upon respondent No.4 and informed that she is in Hyderabad and in pursuance of said order, she can appear before him to collect the notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS. The petitioner appeared before respondent No.4 on 06.12.2024 with the orders of this court. Instead of issuing a notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS, the petitioner was detained for 12 hours at P.S., Central Crime Station and was arrested by respondent No.4. Aggrieved by such arrest, the petitioner filed W.P.No.34709 of 2024 and the petitioner was released on interim bail vide order dated 09.12.2024. After being released on bail, the petitioner appeared before respondent No.4 to cooperate with the investigation. At that time, the petitioner was informed that she cannot travel as a Look Out Circular is issued against her. The petitioner pleaded that she is an overseas citizen of India bearing card number A3141253 and has passport bearing No.RA6035542 issued by Australian Government. The petitioner is residing in India and owns properties 2 RY,J W.P_14629_2025 in India. The petitioner's son is also a resident of Australia and therefore, she intends to travel to Australia to meet her son, and the same is not possible on account of the Look Out Circular. The petitioner pleaded that respondent No.4 issuing a Look Out Circular against her is illegal, as she cooperated with the investigation by appearing before respondent No.4 to receive the notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS and also challenged her detention by filing W.P.No.34709 of 2024. The petitioner pleaded that there is gross abuse of process of law and violation of fundamental rights in the mechanical manner of issuance of Look Out Circular against her. The petitioner pleaded that her free travel is prevented by respondent Nos.3 and 4 and thereby, her fundamental rights are curtailed. As per judgment in the case between Poladi Abhirath v. State of Telangana in W.P.No.74 of 2024, whenever a notice under Section 41A of Cr.P.Cis issued or whenever bail is obtained by the accused, it is an obligation on the part of the police to address a letter to Commissioner and the Commissioner shall in turn address a letter to Immigration Authorities to close LOC. In violation of said settled principle, respondent No.4 communicated with respondents Nos.1 to 3, and a Look Out Circular has been issued. As per Article 21 of Constitution of India, no one shall be deprived of their right to life and liberty, except in accordance with the procedure established by law. To issue a Look Out Circular, the law enforcement has to exercise great caution, and such a 3 RY,J W.P_14629_2025 circular can be issued only for valid reasons. The issuance of LOC against the writ petitioner is unwarranted and as such, prayed that the respondents be directed to withdraw said Look Out Circular.
4. The respondent No.4 opposed the writ petition stating that on 23.11.2024, a complaint was received from one B. Jagadesh Kumar against the petitioner who is accused No.1 in Crime No.233 of 2024 for the offences under Sections 420, 406, 408, 468 and 471 r/w 120B- of IPC. On the basis of said complaint, a crime was registered with the petitioner as accused No.1. The petitioner approached this court by filing a quash petition vide Crl.P.No.14556 of 2024. Statements of 16 witnesses are recorded and said witnesses have stated that the petitioner used their bank accounts by saying that she is facing some tax deduction issues and credited the amounts from Administrative Staff College of India by furnishing fabricated and forged resumes/curriculum vitae in the names of certain people. On the basis of said statements, Sections 467 and 419 were added to the existing sections of IPC charged against the petitioner. The petitioner was arrested and produced before the XII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Hyderabad, and was remanded to judicial custody on 06.12.2024. Thereafter, she was released on bail on 10.12.2024. During the course of investigation, respondent No.4 addressed a letter to the Deputy 4 RY,J W.P_14629_2025 Commissioner of Police, CCS, DD, Hyderabad to instruct the concerned to issue Look Out Circular against the petitioner who is an Australian citizen having passport bearing No.RA6035542 issued on 03.04.2024 valid upto 03.04.2034. In case, the petitioner leaves the Country, it may result in indefinite pendency of the legal proceedings initiated against her. The respondent No.4 pleaded that the presence of the petitioner is necessary for the investigation. The petitioner is an Australian citizen and her son is also an Australian citizen and therefore, she might not return to India. According to the Forensic Audit Report dated 02.03.2025, there is identification of potential misapplication in transactions with total 36 vendors for an amount of Rs.6,04,39,983/-. The petitioner along with accused No.2- M. Ravikumar used the bank accounts stating that she is facing tax deduction issues and credited amounts from Administrative Staff College of India (ASCI) furnishing forged and fabricated resumes/curriculum vitae in their names without providing any services to ASCI. The petitioner has also committed offence of impersonation by making fraudulent forged invoices as valuable security documents with criminal intention. The case is still under investigation for collecting witnesses' specimen signatures and handwritings and to send them to FSL for comparison. In view of the foregoing, the respondent No.4 sought dismissal of the writ petition.
5
RY,J W.P_14629_2025
5. The learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner was already detained by the police illegally and therefore, she has filed W.P.No.34709 of 2024 and was released on interim bail vide order dated 09.12.2024. After grant of bail, the petitioner appeared before the police and received the notice issued under Section 35(3) of BNSS and also cooperated with investigation. When an accused appears to receive notice issued under 35(3) of BNSS or when bail is granted, the circular issued by the Department of Immigration and the guidelines issued with respect to Look Out Circulars, mandates withdrawal of the Look Out Circular. Further, the learned counsel for petitioner referred to order of this court in the case of Poladi Abhirath (supra) in W.P.No.74 of 2024, wherein it is held as follows:
"6. The Ministry of Home Affairs, Foreigners Division, (Immigration Section), Government of India, has issued Office Memorandum dated 22.02.2021 framing consolidated guidelines for issuance of Look Out Circulars in respect of Indian Citizens and foreigners. As per Clause 6(L) of the said guidelines, in exceptional cases, LOCs can be issued even in such cases, as may not be covered by the guidelines above, whereby departure of a person from India may be declined at the request of any of the authorities mentioned in clause (B), if it appears to such authority based on inputs received that the departure of such person is detrimental to the sovereignty or security or integrity of India or that the same is detrimental to the bilateral relations with any country or to the strategic and/or economic interests of India or if such person is allowed to leave, he may potentially indulge in an act of terrorism or offences against the State and/or that such departure ought not be permitted in the larger public interest at any given point of time. As per the Circular Memorandum dated 01.07.2022 vide C.No.3089/C-3/IP/CID/2019-22 issued by the Director General of 6 RY,J W.P_14629_2025 Police, Telangana, Hyderabad, in all caseswhere the person against whom LOC has been opened is no longer wanted by the Originating Agency or by the Competent Court, the LOC deletion request must be conveyed to Bureau of Immigration immediately so that liberty of the individual is not jeopardized. Further, it is stated in the report filed by the Director General of Police that LOC will be continued basing on their satisfaction whether the person is going to cooperate with the investigation or not. Further, as per the instructions issued by the Director General of Police vide circular dated 01.07.2022, whenever notice under Section 41A of Cr.P.C is issued orwhenever bail is obtained by the accused, it is an obligation on the part of the police to address a letter to the Commissioner and the Commissioner in turn shall address a letter to the Immigration Authorities to close the LOC."
6. The learned counsel for petitioner referred to the instructions issued by the Director General of Police by its circular dated 01.07.2022, whereby when a notice is issued under Section 41A of Cr.P.C or whenever bail is obtained by the accused, there is an obligation on the part of the police to address a letter to the Commissioner and the Commissioner in turn to address a letter to the Immigration Authorities to close the Look Out Circular. On the basis of the above finding given by this court, it is argued that the petitioner is also squarely falling under the similar set of facts wherein she was detained and then, she was released on bail vide orders in W.P.No.34709 of 2024 and the petitioner also received notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS and also cooperated with investigation and therefore, she is entitled to relief of withdrawal of Look Out Circular issued against her.
7
RY,J W.P_14629_2025
7. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondent No.4 to 7 argued that the case of the petitioner stands on a different footing as she is an Australian citizen holding passport from said Country. Further, the son of the petitioner is also an Australian citizen. In case, the petitioner leaves the country, it is likely that she may not come back and the investigation as well as trial of the criminal case may be jeopardized. It is further argued that the investigation is still in progress and her presence is necessary for the purpose of completing investigation.
8. The petitioner is accused of committing offences punishable under various sections of BNS, in addition to the petitioner being an accused No.1 in Crime No.233 of 2024, which was registered on complaint given by one B. Jagadesh Kumar. The petitioner is accused of misuse of Rs.6,04,39,983/- cash belonging to Administrative Staff College of India by employing fake resumes and curriculum vitae in the name of certain persons. There are about 36 such fake transactions. The police are in the process of recording their statements to file charge sheet. About 11 witnesses are examined, and investigation is still in progress. While so, the petitioner is seeking withdrawal of Look Out Circular issued against her. This issue is canvassed in the light of order of this Court in the case of Poladi Abhirath (supra) in W.P.No.74 of 2024, where this Court 8 RY,J W.P_14629_2025 allowed withdrawal of Look Out Circular since the petitioner therein was appearing regularly before the Criminal Court in the criminal case registered. In the instant case, the respondent authorities are opposing the withdrawal of Look Out Circular on account of the fact that the petitioner and her son are Australian citizens. Once the petitioner leaves India, there is likelihood that she may not return back as her passport is valid upto the year 2034. In such an event, the respondents apprehend that the investigation as well as trial of pending proceedings would be hampered. In the case of Poladi Abhirath (supra), the petitioner was an Indian, a resident of Karimnagar District in Telangana State. In said case, the investigation was completed and the criminal case was registered in C.C.No.470 of 2016 and trial has commenced with the petitioner therein cooperating with the progress in trial. In the instant case, the fact pattern is different as the petitioner is an Australian citizen. Her son is also an Australian citizen. There is possibility of the petitioner not returning to India in case she is permitted to leave the country. In such an event, as apprehended by the respondents, the investigation may be jeopardized as well as there would be no likelihood of any conclusion to the criminal proceedings. Since the case of Poladi Abhirath (supra), relied upon by the petitioner is not comparable to the facts of the present case, said citation would not come to the aid of the petitioner in seeking withdrawal of Look Out Circular.
9
RY,J W.P_14629_2025
9. In view of the foregoing discussion, this Court does not see any reason to direct the respondents to withdraw the Look Out Circular.
10. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed.There shall be no order as to costs. Pending Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________ RENUKA YARA, J Date:06.04.2026 GVL 10 RY,J W.P_14629_2025 511 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA WRIT PETITION NO.14629of 2025 THE 06th DAY OF APRIL, 2026 W GVL 11