Dr.Naveen Rao v. Union Of India & ORS

$~41 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 11098/2017 DR.NAVEEN RAO ..... Petitioner Through Mr R.K. Handoo, Mr Yoginder Handoo, Mr Nishant Kumar, Advocates.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr Anil Soni, CGSC with Ms Priyanka Singh, Advocates for CGSC/R1 and R3.

Mr Anupam S. Sharrma, SPP for CBI with Mr Prachee Satija, Mr Prakash Airan, Advocates for R2/CBI.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 15.12.2017 CM 45377/2017 1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.

The application is disposed of.

W.P.(C) 11098/2017 & CM 45376/2017 3.

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, seeking an order quashing a Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against the petitioner at the instance of Inspector Subhash Chandra, Central Bureau of Investigation, Chandigarh. Apparently, a request for issuing a LOC was made as certain investigation are pending regarding an FIR bearing No. RCCHG2015A0019 dated 15.09.2015. It is the petitioner's case that even though he has not been named in the FIR, he has been cooperating with the investigation and has

appeared before the concerned officer on several occasions including on 08.11.2016, 06.12.2016, 23.12.2016, 29.03.2017, 08.09.2017, 25.11.2017 and 30.11.2017. The petitioner also undertakes that he would fully cooperate with the investigation and appear before the concerned officer as and when required. Mr Handoo, the learned counsel for the petitioner also states that the petitioner would be willing to submit a bank guarantee. He also points out that the petitioner has substantial immovable properties located in India and there is no question of the petitioner evading the process of law in this country.

4.

In view of the above, this Court is of the view that it would be apposite for the concerned Officer to consider the petitioner's request for the withdrawal of the LOC, in the first instance. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned officer on 18.12.2017. The concerned officer shall examine the petitioner's request for the withdrawal of the LOC and dispose of the said request on the same day itself by passing a speaking order. In the event the petitioner is aggrieved by the decision of the concerned officer, he is at liberty to take appropriate steps.

5.

The petition and the application are disposed of with the aforesaid directions.

6.

Order dasti to both parties.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J DECEMBER 15, 2017 pkv