I Was Stopped at the Airport Because of a Look Out Circular: What It Is, How to Find Out Who Issued It, and How to Get It Cancelled

A Look Out Circular is not a court order and not a passport action. It is an instruction sent by an "originating agency" to the Bureau of Immigration, on a proforma, telling the officers at every immigration check post what to do when you present yourself: detain you, stop you from leaving, or only report your movement. It rests on a Home Ministry memorandum of 22 February 2021, not on any statute, and it is cancelled in one way only, by a deletion request from the agency that asked for it, or by a court order that reaches the Bureau through that same agency. No public register exists, so finding the originator is the first job.

Part of the criminal defence practice at S Jain & Attorneys, Bangalore.

This page is for a person stopped at immigration, or who fears a stop: a director or guarantor of a company in default, a person named in an FIR, an NRI with a case in India, or a businessman under an Enforcement Directorate, SFIO or Income Tax inquiry. Passport impounding is a different power, covered for a maintenance case in our guide on impounding an NRI husband's passport.

Six routes exist, and none works for every reader.

What is a Look Out Circular, and what are the three things it can tell immigration to do?

It is a request in a prescribed proforma from an originating agency to the Deputy Director of the Bureau of Immigration. The 2021 memorandum, as the Bombay High Court reproduces it in Viraj Chetan Shah v Union of India, decided on 23 April 2024, requires the originator to specify in the proforma the action to be taken on detection, and allows a circular only where three identifying parameters are available, or the name and passport particulars.

The action column carries one of three instructions. Where a cognizable offence is alleged, the subject may be detained or prevented from leaving. Where none is, clause 6(I) says the subject "cannot be detained/arrested or prevented from leaving the country" and the originator "can only request that they be informed about the arrival/departure of the subject". A circular may also be opened on a criminal court's direction, through the police, under clause 6(C). The Indian Express reported on 10 March 2026 that the Ministry had, a month earlier, told every law enforcement agency that statutory bodies with no criminal jurisdiction cannot request a circular directly and that the proforma now carries three standardised options: "detain and inform originator", "prevent departure and inform originator" and "see remarks for action". We have not seen that communication in the original, so nothing here rests on it.

Key takeaway. A circular has no expiry date. Clause 6(J) says it "shall remain in force until and unless a deletion request is received" from the originator itself, and that "No LOC shall be deleted automatically". Waiting it out is not a strategy.

Who can open a Look Out Circular against me?

Only an officer of the rank listed among the fifteen originators in clause 6(B), or a criminal court through the police. The list opens with Deputy Secretaries to the Government of India and Joint Secretaries in a State Government, takes in District Magistrates, Superintendents of Police and the central investigating, revenue and intelligence agencies, and ends, at entry (xv), with the Chairman, Managing Director or Chief Executive of a public sector bank. Statutory bodies such as the National Commission for Women are not on it: clause 6(M) sends them to the police.

Entry (xv) has been struck down. In Viraj Chetan Shah the Bombay High Court held the inclusion of bank heads arbitrary and an unguided delegation of power, quashed it, quashed every circular before it that a public sector bank had requested, and directed the Bureau to ignore any circular issued at a bank's request. The Union's challenge is pending in the Supreme Court, and the position is set out below.

Two further clauses matter. Clause 6(G): the legal liability for action taken by immigration "rests with the originating agency". Clause 6(L), the exception agencies lean on: in "exceptional cases" departure may be declined where the originator has inputs that it is detrimental to the sovereignty, security or integrity of India, to bilateral relations, to "the strategic and/or economic interests of India", or ought not to be permitted "in the larger public interest". Bank and tax department circulars are opened under that clause, and the quashing cases turn on it.

How does a circular affect me beyond being offloaded at the airport?

It follows you to every check post, and it can produce an arrest rather than a refusal of boarding. The Delhi High Court's record in W.P.(Crl.) 1315/2008, decided on 11 August 2010, shows the circular sent to every State police chief, every seaport and every airport, and the Karnataka High Court's order in W.P. No. 19241 of 2026, decided on 8 July 2026, records a circular executed on arrival at Calicut, followed by custody, against a man who had left for Oman on bail without the trial court's permission.

Two quieter consequences follow. An endorsement can sit in the immigration record and sometimes in the passport: in CWP 5492 of 2022, decided on 5 April 2022, the Punjab and Haryana High Court directed the authorities to expunge "any remarks/endorsements/entries" in the records or passport of a guarantor stopped on her way to an expo. And the circular does not cancel your passport, decide any case, or bar the court seized of your case from letting you travel: it is, in the words of the Delhi High Court's Division Bench on 4 June 2026 in LPA 242/2026, "an exceptional coercive measure", and the single judge held on 10 February 2026 in W.P.(C) 7850/2025 that the agency which sought it must justify it.

Three facts about the instrument decide what you do next.

Why did nobody tell me, and is there a public register I can search?

There is no register, and the memorandum, as the courts reproduce it, has no clause requiring the subject to be told. The Punjab and Haryana High Court tried to add one in CWP 5492 of 2022, directing the authorities to serve a copy of the circular and the reasons "as soon as possible after it is issued" and to give a post-decisional opportunity. On 5 May 2022 the Supreme Court, in SLP(C) 7733 of 2022, declined to stay the judgment except for that direction and the costs, adding that it "shall not be treated as precedent in other cases". The bank's petitions were dismissed as withdrawn on 22 August 2026 after a settlement on costs, so no general duty to inform has been written into the memorandum.

So the airport is where people learn of a circular, and letters asking for disclosure often meet silence: the Delhi High Court's batch judgment of 17 April 2026 in W.P.(C) 17646/2022 and connected petitions records a representation of September 2022 to four agencies "seeking disclosure of the LOC(s), if any", still unanswered at judgment.

How do I find out whether a circular exists, and who issued it?

By combining what the airport told you with your own paper trail, then forcing the agencies to answer in writing:

1. At the counter, ask for the originating agency's name and the circular's reference, and whether you are detained or only refused boarding.
2. Keep the boarding pass, the cancelled ticket, any paper you were given and any endorsement in your passport.
3. The same day, search the e-Courts portal for pending cases and warrants in your name and your companies' names, and reread every notice of the last three years: a SARFAESI demand, a wilful defaulter notice, a summons from the Enforcement Directorate, the SFIO or the Income Tax Department. Each sender is a candidate originator.
4. Write by registered post and email to the agency you suspect and to the Deputy Director, Bureau of Immigration, East Block VIII, R.K. Puram, New Delhi 110066, the address clause 6(A) gives for requests. Ask whether a circular has been requested, by whom, when and under which clause, and ask for the proforma.
5. File an RTI application with both, and with the bank if one is suspected, since public sector banks are public authorities under the Act.
6. If a case is pending, take a certified copy of the order sheet, where a court-directed circular or a warrant shows.
7. Put the answers together: a circular at a bank's request with no FIR sits in one legal category, a circular by an investigating agency in a registered case in another, and the route depends on which you are in.

What will an RTI application get me, and what will it not?

Usually confirmation that a request exists, its date and the originator's identity, and usually not the reasons or the material. Section 8(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 lists what may be withheld: clause (h), "information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders", and clause (g), information whose disclosure "would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes". Section 8(2) allows disclosure where the public interest outweighs the harm, and section 19(1) gives a first appeal within thirty days.

One feature is underused. Section 7(1) requires a reply within thirty days, but its proviso requires that "where the information sought for concerns the life or liberty of a person, the same shall be provided within forty-eight hours", and a circular that stops you leaving the country concerns your liberty.

What happens at the airport, and what should I say and keep?

You are taken aside after your passport is scanned, told that a circular stands against you, and then either sent back from the gate or handed to the agency that opened it. The guarantor in CWP 5492 of 2022 was "prevented from boarding" at Delhi airport and "compelled to come back from the Airport" with no copy of the circular.

Say little, and nothing about the merits. Confirm your identity, ask for the originator's name and the reference, and ask for a written endorsement of what has happened. Sign nothing you have not read. If you are handed to a police or agency team, ask for the grounds, inform a relative or your advocate, and record the time. The Rs 1 lakh in costs awarded against the bank in that case for the lost ticket and the loss of reputation rested on exactly this kind of record.

Common mistake. Booking the next flight on the strength of a court order in your hand. Clause 6(K) says check posts "have no means of verifying genuineness of the Court Order", so orders deleting, quashing or suspending a circular "must be communicated to the BoI through the same Originator who requested for opening of LOC". Serve the order on the originator, obtain a direction that it convey the order to the Bureau, then travel.

How does the originating agency cancel a circular, and how do I ask for it?

By a deletion request to the Bureau, which the memorandum obliges the originator to send the moment the purpose is served. Clause 6(J) requires every circular to be reviewed "on quarterly and annual basis" and, where the person "is no longer wanted by the Originating Agency or by Competent Court", the deletion request to go "immediately so that liberty of the individual is not jeopardized". The Karnataka High Court applied that logic on 8 July 2026: once the man was apprehended, the circular "has exhausted its purpose and, in effect, spent itself".

The Delhi High Court said in 2010 how the subject engages with the originator: the person "may also approach the officer who ordered issuance of LOC & explain that LOC was wrongly issued against him", the circular "can be withdrawn by the authority that issued" it, and in that case withdrawal was directed "within 24 hours" of an undertaking through counsel to appear before the Magistrate. Where a bank is the originator, the Karnataka High Court's order of 20 June 2022 in W.P. No. 11213/2022 shows a negotiated exit: a deposit of Rs 10 lakh against dues of about Rs 66 lakh and a solvent surety, on which the bank was directed to request withdrawal.

Can the court where my case is pending cancel or suspend the circular?

Yes, and where a chargesheet has been filed the High Court will usually send you there first. The 2010 Delhi answers remain the working rules: the circular "can also be rescinded by the trial court where case is pending or having jurisdiction over concerned police station on an application by the person concerned". On 17 April 2026 the Delhi High Court relegated four chargesheeted petitioners to their trial courts, holding that the trial court "has full jurisdiction to modify or cancel the LOC upon an appropriate application".

The application goes to the court seized of the case: the Magistrate before committal, the Sessions Court after it, or the special court where a PMLA or Companies Act complaint is pending. Ask for two directions: that the originator withdraw the circular or modify it to "inform only", and that the order be conveyed to the Bureau through the originator under clause 6(K). If you need one journey rather than deletion, ask for permission to travel on dates with the usual conditions, which our guide on anticipatory bail conditions describes for bail orders generally. One caution comes from the Supreme Court's judgment of 4 June 2026 in 2026 INSC 628: an order releasing your passport "would not, by itself, amount to permission to leave the country".

When do I file a writ petition under Article 226, and what test does the High Court apply?

When no case underlies the circular, or when the court seized of your case cannot give the relief, and the test is whether the conditions for a circular existed on the date it was requested and still exist. The Madras High Court settled the threshold in Karti P. Chidambaram v Bureau of Immigration, decided on 23 July 2018: a circular is "a coercive measure to make a person surrender" with adverse civil consequences, so it is open to judicial review under Article 226, its validity is judged "having regard to the circumstances prevailing on the date on which the request" was made, and it "cannot be issued as a matter of course, but when reasons exist, where an accused deliberately evades arrest or does not appear in the trial Court".

The Delhi High Court restated the test in W.P.(C) 7850/2025: the burden "lies squarely upon the originating agencies to justify, the necessity, proportionality, and legality of the restraint", the economic-interest clause is for "rare and compelling cases", the circular "is not indefinite and must be periodically reviewed", and where the subject has cooperated its continuation "would amount to an unreasonable and unjustified restriction on personal liberty". It quashed an Enforcement Directorate circular on that basis on 28 September 2026 in W.P.(C) 10167/2026, after a six-year investigation in which every summons had been honoured.

The test is not a rerun of the investigation. On 12 August 2026, in LPA 78/2022, a Division Bench set aside a 2022 quashing after reading the department's file in a sealed cover, holding that where the authorities had material to think departure would harm the economic interests of India, the court does not substitute its own satisfaction for theirs.

My circular was opened at a bank's request: where does the law stand after Viraj Chetan Shah?

The Bombay judgment stands unstayed, the Supreme Court's challenge is pending, Delhi quashes bank circulars, Bombay itself now waits, and Karnataka decides case by case. Each position as found on 10 November 2026:

Bombay, 23 April 2024. Clause 6(B)(xv) quashed, every circular before the court quashed, the Bureau directed to "ignore and not act upon any LOCs issued by any public sector banks", and a stay refused.

Supreme Court, from 12 August 2024. In SLP(C) Nos. 17194-17230 of 2024 the Supreme Court's order of 12 August 2024 issued notice, including on the stay application, left the Union free to frame "a fresh Office Memorandum", and directed that "pending consideration of these Special Leave Petitions on the interim stay, the private respondents/writ petitioners before the High Court shall seek permission from the High Court in the event they wish to travel abroad". That is a travel arrangement for the parties, not a stay, and on 28 July 2026 the Delhi High Court's Division Bench held in LPA 534/2026 that "there is no stay of the operation of the judgement in Viraj Chetan Shah (supra) by the Supreme Court". Every later order we found, the last of 7 January 2026, deals only with service, counter affidavits and listing, so check the status of those petitions on the day you file.

Delhi, 2025 to 2026. Bank circulars against guarantors and former directors with no criminal case have been quashed on undertakings to cooperate, and the batch judgment of 17 April 2026 quashed the bank-originated circulars before it on a common condition: the full itinerary intimated to the bank at least 48 hours before departure.

Bombay, after that order. On 27 August 2024 a Division Bench in W.P.(L) No. 25196 of 2024 suspended a bank circular for one business trip on undertakings, noting that "the parties are required to obtain leave of the Court to travel abroad", and on 18 June 2026, in W.P.(L) No. 2020 of 2026, another Bench held that "judicial propriety requires that this Court waits" for the Supreme Court. A bank circular challenged in Mumbai today is more likely to be suspended for trips than quashed.

Karnataka. W.P. No. 11213/2022, decided on 20 June 2022, held that a circular "cannot be a mode of recovery of dues", that the bank must first decide whether the case is one of "fraud or default which would affect economic interest of the Country", and allowed the petition in part on a deposit and a surety. In W.P. No. 4385 of 2023, decided on 9 February 2024, a single judge held that section 21 of the Passports Act, which allows delegation only by a Gazette notification and only to subordinate officers, State Governments or consular officers, meant the memoranda were "non est" and of no aid to the banks, kept the circulars in suspended animation, and permitted travel on an affidavit not to alienate property, two sureties of Rs 1 crore each and an undertaking to return. And on 30 April 2026, in W.P. No. 3143 of 2026, the court refused a guarantor adjudged bankrupt any travel in his individual capacity but allowed travel strictly as chief executive of his employer, on a no-objection certificate from the NCLT, an employer's declaration and a short validity passport.

What is a one-time travel permission, and what do courts ask for?

It is an order suspending the circular for named dates, and it is the relief most readers get first, so offer the usual conditions before the judge asks. The Bombay order of 27 August 2024 required an undertaking "setting out a detailed itinerary of the above travel including the airline tickets, addresses of the hotels", a return by a fixed date, no extension application until return, and a post-travel affidavit of the meetings held and the expenses incurred. The Supreme Court's interim order of 5 May 2022 in SLP(C) 7733 of 2022 required an undertaking not to dispose of assets and that the Bureau be kept "informed of the dates of departure from and entry into India". The Delhi orders of 2026 settled on itinerary intimation 48 hours before departure to a bank and a complete itinerary, with return intimated within 72 hours, to an investigating agency.

The permission is only as good as its communication. Ask the court to record that immigration will act on an authenticated or digitally signed copy, as the Bombay Bench did, and to direct the originator to convey the order to the Bureau. For the travel condition in a bail order, our guide to how far a court can go when granting bail covers the conditions themselves.

How long does all this take, and what does it cost?

A one-time permission can come on the first or second listing, a deletion by the originator takes weeks if it comes at all, and a contested quashing takes months to years. The guarantor stopped on 22 February 2022 had her circular set aside on 5 April 2022, while the Income Tax circular of 25 February 2019 was quashed in January 2022 and restored in August 2026.

Costs vary widely by court, counsel and the number of listings, and nothing here is a quotation. As indicative ranges only: a representation with an RTI application, Rs 10,000 to Rs 40,000 in professional charges, an application before the trial court, Rs 20,000 to Rs 1,00,000, and a writ petition with interim applications, Rs 1,00,000 to Rs 5,00,000, with senior counsel above that band.

Four doors lead out of a circular, and the paper that opens each is different.

What should I not do, and what do we see go wrong?

Do not try another door: the circular goes to every immigration check post, sea and land included. Do not apply for a second passport: the proviso to section 10(3)(b) of the Passports Act, 1967 requires the passport authority to impound or revoke a second passport obtained while the first is impounded or revoked. Do not give an undertaking you cannot keep: in W.P. No. 19241 of 2026 the Karnataka High Court dismissed the petition of a man who had left for Oman on bail without permission, because his liberty was now for the trial court that had refused him bail. And do not treat a bank's offer to withdraw the circular on payment as a legal process: the request must actually go to the Bureau, so hold the bank's letter before you book.

What we see go wrong is simpler than the law. People spend the first fortnight arguing with the bank by telephone instead of writing to the originator and the Bureau, so nothing is on record when the writ is filed. Applications ask for the circular to be quashed and nothing else, when a one-time permission with an itinerary would have been granted on the first date. And the undertaking is drafted in the agency's words, promising attendance on any notice at any place, which no one with a job abroad can honour. A circular is an instrument with an author, a clause and a purpose. Find the author, name the clause, and show the purpose is spent.

Frequently Asked Questions

This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice on your specific situation.

Related Guides

The firm's criminal defence practice handles representations to originating agencies and applications before the court seized of a case, and the High Court litigation practice takes the writ petition under Article 226 where a circular has no case behind it.

• Impounding an NRI Husband's Passport to Enforce Maintenance
• Taking a Child Abroad When Parents Are Separated: Passport and Consent
• Anticipatory Bail Conditions: What Courts Can Impose