- -. ORDER : 1. This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioners seeking the following relief: “issue a Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondents in issuing Look Out Circular (LOG) and continuing the same against the Petitioners under their respective passports bearing Nos. U0875805 and V2904044, in connection with Crime No. 98 of 2024 before the Mahila UPS’Visakhapatnam (7th Respondent) in spite of accepting notices U/s. 41 A Cr.PC (35 (3) BNSS) and submitting personal bonds with two sureties, is as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently quash the LOC issued against the Petitioners relating to the passport Nos. U0875805 and V2904044, connecting to Crime No.98 of 2024 before the Mahila UPS, Visakhapatnam.” 2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Home, appearing on behalf of the respondents, and perused the material available on record. 3. The petitioners herein are a daughter and mother, respectively, who reside in Abu Dhabi. The brother of the petitioner got married and is living separately in Hyderabad. Meanwhile, the sister-in-law of the 1st petitioner lodged a complaint against the petitioners and her husband in Crime No.98 of 2024, dated 02.04.2024, for the offences under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘the IPC’) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short ‘the DP Act’). The Immigration Authorities intercepted and took the petitioners into custody on 17.07.2025, at Hyderabad Airport. Thereafter, the 7th respondent served notices under Section 41-A of the Cr.P.C. on the petitioners, directing them to appear before the 7th respondent at 10:00 a.m. on 18.07.2025. The petitioners were released after submitting their personal bonds. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that 1st  petitioner’s brother has performed a love marriage, and they have been residing separately at Hyderabad for 13 years. The leave obtained by the 1 petitioner appears to have expired 17.08.2025, and the vacation of her children is also scheduled to on end on 25.08.2025. The petitioners are required to travel back to Abu Dhabi; failing which, the 1st petitioner will lose her employment, and the education of her children will be compromised. The leave obtained by the 1 petitioner appears to have expired 17.08.2025, and the vacation of her children is also scheduled to on end on 25.08.2025. The petitioners are required to travel back to Abu Dhabi; failing which, the 1st petitioner will lose her employment, and the education of her children will be compromised. Learned counsel further submits that the very issuance of Look Out Circular (LOG) against the family members in a matrimonial dispute for the offence under Section 498-A I.P.C. is per se illegal and the same is liable to be quashed. 5. Learned Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, submits that the petitioners were served with 41-A Cr.P.C. notice and thereafter they have appeared before the Investigating Agency on 18.07.2025. Learned Government Pleader further submits that the presence of the petitioners is required before the competent jurisdictional Court at the time of trial. 6. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are ready to appear before the Court as and when their presence is required and prays to quash the Look Out Circulars issued against them. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the petitioners has relied on the order, dated 09.10.2023, passed by this Court in W.P. No.16136 of 2023, wherein this Court at Para Nos.6 and 7 held as follows: “6.......The Look Out Circular (LOG) has not been defined anywhere legally. In Sumer Singh Saikan Vs. Assistant Directors in W.P. (Crl.) No. 1315 of 2008 and Crl. Ref. No. 1 of 2006, High Court of Delhi held that LOG can be taken by investigating agency in cognizable offences under IPC or other penal laws where the accused was deliberately evading arrest or not appearing in the trial Court despite NBWs and other coercive measures and if there is any likelihood of accused leaving the country to evade trial/arrest and only in those circumstances, LOG can be opened as against the accused therein. It is trite that the recourse can be had for issue of LOG by the police only in drastic contingencies. Without there being any proper procedure followed, coming to conclusion, to issue LOG is bad. It is not that the accused is not cooperating with the trial or is evading arrest. In W.P. No. 12687 of 2022, dated 02.05.2022, this Court held as hereunder: “POINT: I gave my anxious consideration to the above respective submissions. Without there being any proper procedure followed, coming to conclusion, to issue LOG is bad. It is not that the accused is not cooperating with the trial or is evading arrest. In W.P. No. 12687 of 2022, dated 02.05.2022, this Court held as hereunder: “POINT: I gave my anxious consideration to the above respective submissions. It is trite that the recourse can be had for issue of LOG only in extreme cases where the investigating agency establishes that the accused in cognizable cases deliberately evaded arrest not appeared despite issuing of NBW and other coercive measures and also that there every likelihood of accused absconding from the Country jurisdiction of the concerned Criminal Court and thereby to evade arrest/trial and other or was as to not to submit to the so criminal proceedings. In Sumer Singh Saikan’s case cited by the learned counsel for the the High Court of Delhi reiterated the above aspect as to under what circumstance to the LOC can be taken. 8. Be that it petitioners recourse may, the present case is concerned, admittedly, we are not at the stage of issuing of LOC since it was already issued and pending against the petitioners. However what is germane for consideration is whether the LOC can be allowed to be continued against the petitioners when in the charge-sheet filed by the police, they gave clean chit to them. To confirm whether the police laid charge-sheet exonerated petitioners or not, this Court through Registrar (Judicial) information from the and called for relevant Court of Judicial Magistrate of I Class for Trial of Prohibition Excise Offences-cum-FAC JMFC Mobile Court, Nellore. Learned Magistrate vide letter dated 29.04.2022 sent the relevant information & stating that in Crime No.231/2021 the Sub-Inspector of Police. Disha Police Station. Nellore laid charge-sheet against accused Nos.1 to 3 on 24.09.2021 while mentioning that he found no involvement of accused Nos.4 And 5 i.e. the petitioners herein and thereby not chargesheeted them. Learned Magistrate further intimated that the charge-sheet came up for consideration before him on 02.03.2022 and on perusal of the record he found prima facie case against the accused Nos.1 to 3 but found no incriminating material against the accused Nos.4 and 5 in the charge-sheet and hence he issued notice to de facto complainant directing her appearance before the Court on 25.04.2022 for filing objections if any. Accordingly de facto complainant appeared before the Court 25.04.2022 and sought time for filing protest petition and hence learned Magistrate extended the time till 03.06.2022.” 7. By virtue of opening the LOC, the personal liberty of the person is curtailed. The LOCs are only the circular instructions that have been issued by the respondent/police only with a view to detain a person or to see that he will cooperate with the trial. Of late, in each and every case that has been registered under Section 498-A IPC, it has become that the respondent/police, without looking into the aspects whether the petitioner is cooperating with the trial or he is evading arrest, in mechanical manner, are opening the LOCs. It is essential that the police have to open LOCs against the persons who are the accused for grave offences or the persons who are involved in financial irregularities, or the offences which are against the Society. In such the respondent/police can resort in opening the LOCs against the accused in not permitting them to leave the country. If the accusation against the accused persons is such that it is detrimental to the Nation, then LOG can be issued.” 7. In similar circumstances, this Court in W.P. No.325 of 2025, dated 22.01.2025, allowed the Writ Petition by quashing the LOG issued against the petitioner therein. 8. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the law laid down by this Court, in the aforesaid Writ Petitions, the Writ Petition is allowed, and the Look Out Circulars issued against the petitioners are hereby quashed. If the petitioners are so advised, they are directed to appear before the trial Court and co-operate for trial. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.