Basant Bansal & ORS. v. Union Of India & ORS.

$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 8661/2024, CM APPL. 35433/2024 BASANT BANSAL & ORS.

.....Petitioners Through:

Mr. Vijay Aggarwal, Mr. Rachit, Mr.

Pankush Goyal, Mr. Siddharth, Mr.

Kshitiz, Mr. Shekhar, Mr. Anuj Singh Tanwar, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

.....Respondents Through:

Ms. Arunima Dwivedi, CGSC with Mr. Aakash Pathak, Advocate with Ms. Pinky Pawar, GP for R-1, 2 & 3

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R D E R

% 30.08.2024 CM APPL. 50103/2024 (application under Section 151 CPC for inserting the presence of counsel for the Respondent in order dated 14th August, 2024) 1.

For the grounds and reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed.

2.

The appearance of Ms. Arunima Dwivedi, CGSC and Ms. Pinky Pawar, GP, for Union of India in W.P.(C) 8661/2024, shall be read in order dated 14th August, 2024.

3.

Disposed of.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

W.P.(C) 8661/2024 4.

The present petition seeks the following reliefs: "A. Issue appropriate Writ, Order or Direction especially in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ to quash the Impugned Office Memorandum No.25016/10/2017- Imm.(Pt.)/Government of India/Ministry of Home Affairs (Foreigners Division) dated 22.02.2021 read with Office Memorandum dated 27.10.2010 bearing no. 25016/31/2010-Imm. and subsequent Office Memorandums dated 05.12.2017 and 19.07.2018 bearing no. 25016/10/2017-Imm. (Pt.), and others;

AND B. Issue appropriate Writ, Order or Direction especially in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ to quash the LOC, if any, issued against the Petitioners by the Respondent No.2 and Respondent No.3 at the behest of the Respondent No. 4 investigating agency i.e., Directorate of Enforcement; and, C. Pass necessary order(s) or direction(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice." 5.

At the outset, Mr. Vijay Aggarwal, counsel for the Petitioners, states on instructions that he would be satisfied in case the Respondents were to provide the details of the Look Out Circulars (LOCs), if any, issued against the Petitioner by Respondents No. 2 and 3 at the behest of Respondent No.4/ Directorate of Enforcement.

6.

Ms. Arunima Dwivedi, CGSC representing for Respondents No. 1, 2 and 3, on instructions, states that they will provide the details of the LOCs against the Petitioners which have originated from Directorate of Enforcement/Respondent No. 4 by today itself. In light of this statement, Mr. Aggarwal states that no further directions are necessary and the present petition can be disposed of.

7.

In light of the above, the present petition is disposed of along with pending applications.

8.

All rights and liberties of the Petitioner to take action against the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

LOCs, details of which will be furnished by the Respondents, shall remain available to the Petitioner.

SANJEEV NARULA, J AUGUST 30, 2024/ab The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.