HP High Court Quashes LOC Against British Citizen In Property Dispute, Permits Overseas Travel Subject To Conditions

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has quashed a Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against a British citizen in connection with a property dispute, holding that there was no material to suggest that he had attempted to evade arrest or failed to join the investigation despite coercive measures.

Justice Sandeep Sharma held that the LOC was issued merely on the basis of apprehension and in the absence of circumstances warranting such a measure. The Court permitted the petitioner to travel abroad upon complying with conditions, including furnishing an FDR of ₹10 lakh and two local sureties of ₹2 lakh each before the trial court.

Justice Sandeep Sharma remarked that: “This petition is allowed and Look Out Circular issued against the petitioner in relation to FIR No. 79 of 2025 registered at Police Station Kandaghat is quashed and set aside.“Upon petitioner's complying with the above conditions and to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court, he shall be at liberty to travel abroad.”

Background:

The petitioner, Aditya Kaushik, approached the Himachal Pradesh High Court seeking quashing of a Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against him in connection with an FIR registered under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code over a dispute concerning the sale and purchase of a resort and adjoining land.

The complainant alleged that substantial amounts had been paid to the petitioner based on representations regarding the transferability of the adjoining land, but the transaction remained incomplete.

The petitioner contended that the LOC prevented him, a British citizen, from travelling abroad to visit his family. The police justified its issuance by citing concerns regarding his availability for investigation.

The Himachal Pradesh High Court observed that there was no material to suggest that the petitioner had attempted to evade arrest or failed to appear before the investigating agency or trial court despite coercive measures.

It held that the LOC had been issued merely on the basis of apprehension, without circumstances justifying such action. The Court further observed that the dispute was primarily civil in nature and criminal proceedings appeared to have been initiated to exert pressure on the parties.

Accordingly, it quashed the LOC, permitting the petitioner to travel abroad subject to furnishing an FDR of ₹10 lakh, two local sureties of ₹2 lakh each, and complying with other conditions to ensure his availability for investigation and court proceedings.

Date of Decision: 25.09.2026