Copyright thehindu
Declaring that the trial courts have no power in law to deal with the issue of legality of Look Out Circulars (LOCs), the High Court of Karnataka has directed all the trial courts in taluk and district level either not to entertain any plea challenging LOCs or direct the police stations to remove/withdraw LOCs. If the trial courts are found interfering with the LOCs, such action would be viewed seriously, the High Court said after it was brought to its notice that trial courts are interfering in LOCs in several instances. Justice M. Nagaprasanna issued the directions while disposing of the petitions filed by a couple in conflict. Only Constitutional courts “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 scrutinise, rescind, or uphold a LOC flows solely from the font of constitutional jurisdiction, vested in the writ courts,” the High Court observed. To countenance any encroachment upon this settled demarcation of authority, the High Court said, would be to invite anarchy into the administration of justice. “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,” the High Court observed. Petition by husband The husband had filed a petition before the High Court challenging the LOC and had simultaneously moved the trial court, which permitted him to travel abroad by directing city police to withdraw the LOC issued against him in connection with the criminal cases registered against him by his wife on the allegations of harassment, demand for dowry, domestic violence, etc., when he was working in Scotland, United Kingdom. The wife had filed the petition seeking direction to the police to arrest her husband and to initiate action against the police personnel who failed to arrest him when her husband came to India.
