Family Court Has No Power To Issue Lookout Circulars For Enforcing Maintenance Orders: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has held that a Family Court has no power to issue a Look Out Circular (LOC) while executing an order passed under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which relates to maintenance for wives, children and parents.

Justice Lalitha Kanneganti observed that maintenance orders under Section 125 CrPC create a civil obligation enforced through judicial orders. If a party defaults, the remedy available is execution of the order through attachment of property, issuance of a warrant of arrest, or civil imprisonment. The Court clarified that Look Out Circulars are intended to prevent accused persons or offenders from evading the criminal process, and cannot be issued for recovery of maintenance dues.

The Court further observed that continuing an LOC despite a court order amounts to illegality and contempt of court, and also violates the right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

The petitioner, Mohammed Azeem, had approached the High Court challenging an order dated 30.10.2024 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Mangaluru, by which the Family Court allowed the wife's application and issued a Look Out Circular against the husband.

It was contended on behalf of the petitioner that the Family Court lacked jurisdiction to issue an LOC while executing a maintenance order. Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court judgment in Rajnesh v. Neha and Another [(2021) 2 SCC 324], wherein it was held that for non-payment of maintenance, coercive enforcement measures, including striking off defence, may be resorted to only as a last measure when the default is found to be wilful and contumacious.

On the other hand, counsel appearing for the respondent-wife submitted that once a maintenance order is passed, it is the duty of the husband to comply with it. It was argued that the petitioner was residing outside the country and had failed to comply with the order, leaving the Family Court with no other option but to issue the LOC.

The High Court found merit in the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner and held that the Family Court had no authority to issue a Look Out Circular while executing an order passed under Section 125 CrPC.

The Court further noted that when an order is passed suspending an LOC, it is the duty of the requisitioning authority to immediately communicate the same and ensure withdrawal of the LOC. However, it observed that despite court orders, it had become a practice for officers who had requested issuance of LOCs to take no steps to close them.

Accordingly, the Court directed the Director General of Police to issue necessary instructions to all concerned authorities, ensuring that whenever a court suspends an LOC, the same is promptly communicated to the Bureau of Immigration. The Court directed that responsibility be fixed on the officer who requested issuance of the LOC, failing which departmental action must be initiated, observing that otherwise there would be no sanctity to court orders.

The Court also directed the Registrar General to circulate a copy of the order to all courts dealing with proceedings and execution under Section 125 CrPC, clarifying that Look Out Circulars cannot be issued in such cases.

Allowing the petition, the High Court set aside the order passed by the Family Court.

Appearance: Advocate K Ravishankar for Petitioner.

Advocate K Chandranath Ariga for R1 TO R3.

HCGP Neelakantappa K Purjar FOR R4.

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 436

Case Title: Mohammed Azeem AND Sabeeha & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 22223 OF 2025

Click Here To Read/Download Order