We successfully assisted, advised, and represented our client – an erstwhileKMP of a listed entity (“Our Client”) in a criminal writ petition(WP/4765/2021) filed before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court for quashing aLook Out Circular (“LOC”) open against Our Client at the behest of theSerious Fraud Investigation Office (“SFIO”) in the course of its investigationinto the affairs of the said listed company (“Writ Petition”).
Our Client's key defenses were that (i) the pre-existing conditions forissuance of LOC had not been met, (ii) Our Client was not an accused in anyFIR, (iii) no role had been made out against her by any investigative authority,(iv) Our Client was deeply rooted in the society, and (v) there was noapprehension that she would evade any summons / arrest against her.
During the pendency of the Writ Petition, on behalf of Our Client, wesuccessfully obtained seven interim orders permitting her to travel abroad.
During the pendency of the Writ Petition (at the final hearing stage), uponreview, the SFIO, “permanently downgraded” the LOC. Which according toSFIO meant that Our Client would not be detained at the airport and only herarrival and departure would be informed to the SFIO. This was an interestingdevelopment that was largely unexplored by courts in India.
In the course of final hearing of the Writ Petition, the Court opined that, whilethe office memorandum governing the issuance of LOCs (“OM”) recognizedthe concept of deletion of LOC upon review, there was no provision to“permanently downgrade” a LOC. Accordingly, the Court asked the SFIO toidentify the provision under the OM which allowed for downgrading of a LOC.SFIO relied on Clause (I) of the OM, which provides that in cases where therewas no cognizable offence, the subject of LOC could not be detained orprevented from leaving the country and the Originating Agency could onlyrequest that they be informed about the arrival/departure of the subject.However, upon perusal of Clause (I) of the OM, the Court held that Clause (I)of the OM does not contemplate or provide for any “permanentdowngrading” of a LOC.
The Court allowed the Writ Petition and was pleased to quash and set asidethe LOC against Our Client, on the ground that inter alia Our Client had beencooperating with the investigation and has roots in the society.
The judgment can be found here.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.