Andhra Pradesh HC says that the authorities must apply the mind before issuing Locs

Justice Subba Reddy Satti of the Superior Court of Andhra Pradesh has argued that a surveillance circular (LOC) is a coercive measure that certainly has adverse civil consequences to the extent “A person surrenders and consequently interferes with his right to personal freedom and free movement.”

The court also argued that the issuing authority should apply its mind to the facts of each case before issuing a loc.

The ruling occurred in a case in which the court was dealing with a request for a court order that sought to declare the surveillance circular issued against the petitioner by respondents 1 to 3 to the instance of 4 to 6 in crime No.319 of 2024, airport police station, Visakhapatnam, as illegal, arbitrary and voluntary of article 21 of the Constitution of the Constitution of India.

The petitioner, a manager of Capgemini Australia, had arrived in India for the last rites of his father -in -law. He was arrested at the Visakhapatnam airport and was subsequently informed about the Loc Pending.

Initially, an SMT. Thammineni Jyothsna Rani filed a complaint against the petitioner, his mother, sister and another, alleging harassment before the Dysha police station, Visakhapatnam. A case was recorded for crimes under sections 498a, 506 and 323 of the Indian Criminal Code (IPC) and Sections 3 and 4 of the 1961 Prohibition Law. Later a charges was presented before the I Metropolitan Magistrate Chief I Additional Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, of which the petitioner was aware. A notice was also issued under section 41a of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CR.PC) to the petitioner and others, which cooperated during the investigation.

Later, the petitioner requested the divorce under section 13 (1) (AI) of the Hindu Marriage Law of 1955, and the marriage dissolved, with SMT. Tammineni jyothsna rani ex part. The petitioner’s lawyer said that after the dissolution of the marriage by the competent court, the petitioner married an SMT. U. Swathi on 07.08.2024. From then on, SMT. Thammineni Jyothsna Rani filed another complaint with the airport police on 10.09.2024. This complaint was recorded as Crime No.319 of 2024, dated 17.09.2024, for crimes under sections 85 and 82 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The fifth defendant (police superintendent, Visakhapatnam) issued a surveillance circular in relation to said crime against the petitioner, and the same was sent to respondents 1 to 3.

The court argued that the petitioner, who resides in Australia at the time of registration, may not have been aware of the loc. The police had already delivered a notice under section 35 (3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and the petitioner provided guarantees and cooperated with the investigation. Given these facts, issuing a loc was not justified. The fifth defendant was, therefore, ordered to withdraw the LOC issued on 17.09.2024 in the crime No. 319 of 2024, the airport police station, Visakhapatnam.

The petition was subsequently allowed.

Case number: Writing request No: 4788/2025

Case title: Bagadi Santosh Kumar v. India Union

Judgment date: 12.03.2025

Click here to read/download order