SC calls LOC appeal by CBI, state against Rhea Chakraborty and family frivolous

A bench comprising Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan termed the plea of probe agency as “frivolous” while trashing it

The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed as “frivolous” a petition by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the state of Maharashtra, and the Bureau of Immigration, which challenged the Bombay high court’s decision to quash Look-out Circulars (LOCs) issued against actress Rhea Chakraborty and her family. Issued after the death of actor Sushant Singh Rajput, the LOCs prevented Chakraborty, her brother Showik, and her parents from leaving the country during investigations.

The bench further expressed surprise at the issuance of an LOC for this matter. (File photo)

A bench comprising justices Bhushan R Gavai and KV Viswanathan criticised the agencies’ petition, calling it baseless and implying it was filed merely due to the high-profile nature of the individuals involved.

“You are filing such a frivolous petition only because one of the accused is a high-profile person,” commented the bench, also indicating that the petition could have been dismissed with exemplary costs. It added that the Chakrabortys had “deep roots in society,” dismissing any grounds to keep the LOC in place.

The bench further expressed surprise at the issuance of an LOC for this matter, underscoring the court’s view that there was no basis for such restrictions. When the CBI’s counsel later conveyed that he would not pursue the matter further, the court reiterated its earlier point: “Don’t come in tomorrow, otherwise costs and compliments to the CBI.”

The LOCs, issued in August 2020, were originally established after Rajput’s family filed an FIR in Patna, and the case was subsequently transferred to the CBI. The Bombay high court, however, found the LOCs unjustified, observing that the Chakrabortys had cooperated with the investigation and noting the lack of concrete reasons in the CBI’s request for these restrictions. Citing the constitutional right to travel as a fundamental freedom, the high court had also berated the indefinite continuation of the LOCs.