Rana Ayyub Case: An LOC Is A Coercive Measure To Make A Person Surrender, Violates Right To Travel, Freedom Of Speech: Delhi High Court
(Judicial Quest News Network)
Delhi High Court on Monday allowed Journalist Rana Ayyub to travel abroad; who was last week stopped from flying to London from the Mumbai International Airport, the court said that the Look Out Circular against her by the Enforcement Directorate was issued in haste and “despite absence of any precondition necessitating such measures”.
Justice Chandra Dhari Singh,therefore , set aside the LOC.
He said that. An LOC is a coercive measure to make a person surrender and consequentially interferes with petitioner’s right of personal liberty and free movement. It is to be issued in cases where the accused is deliberately evading summons/arrest or where such person fails to appear in Court despite a Non-Bailable Warrant. In the instant case, there is no contradiction by the respondent to the submission of the petitioner that she has appeared on each and every date before the Investigating Agency when summoned, and hence, there is no cogent reason for presuming that the Petitioner would not appear before the Investigation Agency and hence, no case is made out for issuing the impugned LOC.
It further added that
“The impugned LOC is accordingly liable to be set aside as being devoid of merits as well as for infringing the Human right of the Petitioner to travel abroad and to exercise her freedom of speech and expression. For the reasons discussed above, the impugned LOC is set aside and quashed. However, a balance has to be struck qua the right of the investigation agency to investigate the instant matter as well as the fundamental right of the petitioner of movement and free speech.”
The court said that in the particular facts of the case, it becomes evident that the LOC was issued in haste and despite the absence of any precondition necessitating such a measure. An LOC is a coercive measure to make a person surrender and consequentially interferes with petitioner’s right of personal liberty and free movement.
ASG SV Raju appearing on behalf of Enforcement Directorate apprehended that Ayyub will flee the country and not return back, if allowed to travel abroad.
The court observed that however, the said apprehension is sans merit and without any foundation. It is submitted that there is no material on record to give rise to the said apprehension. Even otherwise, in light of the conduct of the petitioner, as well as the facts that she has booked her return ticket for India dated 11th April 2022 and has her old family at home in Mumbai, there is no basis whatsoever for the said apprehension. In light of the aforesaid, it is submitted that the Look Out Circular has been issued with a mala fide, is devoid of reasons, is violating her fundamental right to travel abroad, hence is bad in law and accordingly be quashed.
Advocate Vrinda Grover arguing for Ayyub said that the apprehension is baseless because.
“I live in Bombay in a Joint family with my old parents, brother, his wife and children.I had a return ticket. I work here; live here.What is there to show apprehension/Can I run away with frozen money? I am more than keen for ED to show that there is nothing hanky panky in the account. I have been co-operating.
There ghas to be a difference in harassment and investigation. Why was I not summoned earlier?They want to make sureyou don’t speak.This harassment has to stop.”
Ayyub was represented by Advocates Vrinda Grover, Soutik Banerjee, Mannat Tipnis, and Devika Tulsiani.
[Read Order]
