Trial courts have no jurisdiction to annul or tamper with lookout circulars: Karnataka HC

Bengaluru: The Karnataka high court has said that the trial courts shall not entertain any challenge concerning lookout circulars (LOC) nor direct the police stations to remove LOCs.

“It is hereby declared and clarified with unmistakable emphasis that the learned Magistrates before whom criminal proceedings are pending, shall not entertain, under any guise or pretext, applications assailing or seeking the recall, suspension or modification of a LOC. Any indulgence by the trial courts in this regard, shall be deemed to be an act in excess of jurisdiction and will invite serious disapproval,” Justice M Nagaprasanna said.

The court said this while disposing two petitions, filed by the husband and the wife in proceedings pending before the trial court. In the high court, the husband had sought recall of the LOC, while the wife challenged the recall of LOC against the husband, which enabled him to leave India.

The couple got married in May 2023 and the wife registered a dowry harassment and cruelty complaint against her husband and his family members in Basavanagudi Women police station when the husband was in Scotland. Subsequently, she also filed a case under Prevention of Women from Domestic Violence (DV) Act. When the husband, now a citizen of Scotland, failed to appear in the proceedings, an LOC was issued.

On February 18, 2024, the husband had to come back, owing to medical emergency in the family. He was detained at Mumbai airport and brought to Bengaluru. The husband moved the high court seeking recall of the LOC issued against him. Simultaneously, he filed another petition before the magistrate for recall of the LOC, suppressing the pendency of this petition before the high court.

On March 18, 2024, the magistrate recalled the LOC and the very next day, the husband flew to Scotland. Later, he withdrew the petition filed before the magistrate and moved a memo before the high court, seeking withdrawal of the pending petition. Besides other prayers, the wife sought directions on detailed guideline regarding the procedure on withdrawal of NOC.

Justice Nagaprasanna disposed of the petition filed by the husband noticing that the husband had already left India. The court also disposed of the petition filed by the wife recording the assurance by the husband that he will attend the court proceedings promptly.

 “The LOC, is an executive edict - administrative in its conception and effect, and therefore, beyond the ken of trial courts to annul or tamper with. The role of such concerned court is confined strictly to adjudicating the criminal lis before them in accordance with the established procedure.

The power to scrutinize, rescind, or uphold a LOC flows solely from the font of constitutional jurisdiction, vested in the writ courts, ie High courts and the Supreme Court. To countenance any encroachment upon this settled demarcation of authority would be to invite anarchy into the administration of justice, eroding both comity and coherence within the judicial framework. Therefore, the trial court has acted beyond its jurisdiction,” Justice Nagaprasanna said.