LOC against Ayyub violated right to travel, freedom of speech: HC
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court Monday quashed a Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against journalist Rana Ayyub by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and allowed her to travel abroad, saying that the LOC was issued in haste and there was no cogent reason for presuming that she will not appear before the investigating agency.
The high court said a LOC is a coercive measure to make a person surrender and consequentially interferes with the petitioner's right to 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 (ED) to the submission of the petitioner (Ayyub) 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, Justice Chandra Dhari Singh said in a six-page order.
The court said it becomes evident that the LOC was issued in haste and in the absence of any precondition necessitating such a measure.
It said the LOC is liable to be set aside as being devoid of merits as well as for infringing the human right of Ayyub 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.
The court allowed the journalist's petition seeking quashing of LOC and imposed various conditions on her, including that she shall intimate her travel dates and detailed itinerary to the ED forthwith along with the address of the places that she shall be visiting.
The court directed her to deposit an FDR of Rs 1 lakh with the ED in Mumbai and said that she shall not attempt to tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses in any manner.
The petitioner shall return to India on the date specified, that is, April 11, 2022, and the petitioner shall give the undertaking to appear before the investigation agency immediately on her return and on dates that might be fixed by the investigating agency for interrogation, if any, after the travel period, it said.
The court's order came on Ayyub's plea seeking to quash a LOC issued against her barring her from travelling abroad.
The plea, however, was opposed by the ED which alleged that she was involved in a serious offence regarding funds involving over Rs one crore and that there was an apprehension that she might not return to India.
Additional Solicitor General S V Raju and lawyer Amit Mahajan, representing the ED, contended that the journalist has misappropriated funds collected in the name of relief work and that she had submitted fake bills and thus the money raised for relief work has been siphoned off.
During the hearing, the judge asked the ED as to how do you defend your LOC? It is an admitted fact that whenever a summons was issued, she replied and she appeared before officers. How do you say that she is avoiding investigation? Because for LOC, evidence should be satisfactory.
To this, the ASG said a person who wants to flee the country will always say that she will come back. Look at her conduct. Despite repeated summons, documents have not been supplied. Fake bills have been provided. According to us prima facie, there is a case of cheating. The cooperation part is missing and appearance before the agency is not cooperation, he argued.
The court responded that "if a person is appearing before the agency and the agency says that the person is appearing but she is not cooperating, what is the yardstick to show that? If there is non-cooperation then why don't you arrest her?
Advocate Vrinda Grover, appearing for Ayyub, submitted that the documents were already there with the ED's Mumbai office and the entire credit card statement was also there.
On being asked by the court whether Ayyub's bank account has been frozen by the agency, the ASG replied in affirmative and said now we want her to sit with us. Our case is money has not been used for COVID relief.
Ayyub was detained at the Mumbai Airport by the Bureau of Immigration on March 29, when she was supposed to travel to London to attend some journalistic events.
