3 min readNew DelhiMar 21, 2026 03:57 AM IST
THE DELHI High Court on Friday quashed look out circulars (LOCs) issued by the Bureau of Immigration (BoI)in 2019 against former directors and promoters of NDTV Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy, holding that such prolonged continuation of LOCs restricting their right to travel is “disproportionate and arbitrary”.
Asserting that the right to travel abroad is an integral part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution, Justice Sachin Datta held that the continued operation of the LOCs against the petitioners is an unjustified curtailment of their fundamental right, which cannot be sustained in law.
The HC has, however, asked the couple to furnish an undertaking that they shall appear before the investigating authority as and when required or directed and fully cooperate with any proceeding in this regard.
A look out circular was first issued against the Roys in 2019 by the BoI following a request by the CBI. This was valid for a year. Subsequently an LOC was issued against the Roys again, at the request of the CBI through the BOI, effective from January 11, 2021, which now stands quashed. The CBI had lodged an FIR against the Roys and others in August 2019 — a second FIR, by the agency after CBI filed the first FIR in 2017 — for cheating and under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
According to the CBI, between May 2004 and May 2010, NDTV Ltd. allegedly floated approximately 32 subsidiary firms across various jurisdictions, including tax havens, for the purpose of routing funds from abroad. However, no chargesheet has been filed till date and a closure report was filed in the first CBI FIR, which was accepted by a court in 2025, effectively closing the proceedings of the first FIR.
Noting that the Roys have been “subjected” to the LOCs for over five years “despite the fact that they have never declined to cooperate with the investigation, have never attempted to abscond from the jurisdiction of the Court, and that no chargesheet has been filed since the registration of the FIR”, the court recorded that denying them the ability to freely travel abroad “for such a prolonged period, in the absence of any material justifying such restriction itself constitutes a substantial prejudice”.
© The Indian Express Pvt Ltd
