Mumbai: While allowing some people to travel abroad while for business purposes, the High Court of the Bombay has directed that looking out circular (LOC) published against them in the example of public sector banks will not come on the way.
Among those who triggered temporary assistance by the Judicial justice bench Patel and Madhav Jamdar on December 9 were Rihen Mehta, promoter-director of Global Green Bridge FZC, and the son of Harshad Mehta from the Berlian Group Rosy Blue.
The company has taken 10 million AED credit from Bank Dubai Baroda Branch and Rihen Mehta is also a private guarantor.
In 2019 he returned to India with his family.
In December 2019, Bob stated the company’s account as a non-performing asset and initiated the recovery process.
On January 13, 2020, Rihen Mehta was stopped at Mumbai airport on the way to New York.
The court heard the challenging petition of the Loc issued by the Interior Ministry after October 4, 2018, the Memorandum Office (OM) where people can be detained from traveling if their departure is detrimental to “Indian economic interests”.
Om allows the chairman of the Indian state bank, and manages the Director and CEO of all other public sector banks to request a LOC problem.
Common complaints from the petition are because individual identities or companies are indebted to the public sector bank, Locs has been issued to hold their journey abroad.
While some applicants have a delayed civil process or recovery and other criminal processes, the bench says no “can be said to escape or fugitive” avoid the arrest or warrant.
While some of the petitions challenged LOC, two questioned the central power to issue such om, said limiting fundamental rights must be with constitutional laws or amendments and not by executive orders.
The additional lawyer General Anil Singh, with Advocate Rui Rodrigues, said for each bank to justify his actions in asking for LOC.
“The fact that a particular bank might be wrong in making the request will not damage the office memorandum itself,” said Singh, added that there was no reason to question the power.
He also said the security problem of the OMS address, not a violation of the blanket of fundamental rights and had default protection.
Because there was a complete challenge for even the first OM October 27, 2010, the judges posted the trial on 4.
February in individual orders, they directed the applicant to provide their travel plans with contact details to court.
HC will not give them further travel permission unless they return to India.
The authority of the immigration at all departure points will allow the applicant to leave the country “regardless of whatever circular spent in the Bank’s instance”.
‘Bizmen can travel abroad despite looking out circular’
