Delhi High Court Suspends LOC, Permits Businessman To Travel Abroad For Healthcare Conferences; Cites Roots In Society & Past Compliance

"These circumstances, coupled with his conduct on previous occasions, considerably dilute any apprehension of the applicant being a flight risk," Delhi High Court, in a significant ruling, permitted a businessman to travel to the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Switzerland despite strong objections from the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO).

A Single Judge Bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma observed that the petitioner’s past conduct of returning to India after prior travel permissions and his deep roots in society outweighed the investigating agency’s apprehensions regarding him being a flight risk.

The petitioner, Karandeep Singh, who is engaged in running a hospital, sought the suspension of a Look Out Circular (LOC) dated December 18, 2020, to attend several international healthcare and AI-driven data science conferences. The SFIO opposed the plea, arguing that this was the petitioner’s fifth request for travel in thirteen months and that he had failed to comply with previous undertakings to furnish essential financial documents. The agency contended that the investigation into serious financial irregularities affecting numerous investors was at a crucial stage.

The primary question before the court was whether the petitioner should be permitted to travel abroad for professional purposes while an active investigation by the SFIO is underway. The court was also called upon to determine if the petitioner’s alleged non-cooperation in furnishing documents justified the continued restriction of his movement despite his history of complying with previous travel conditions.

Court Rejects Apprehension Of Petitioner Being A Flight Risk

The court noted that the petitioner had been granted permission to travel abroad on four previous occasions by the same court and had returned to India within the stipulated period each time. The bench emphasized that the respondent did not dispute the petitioner’s compliance with the timing of his return in those instances.

Roots In Society Dilute Apprehensions

The court took note of observations made in earlier orders which established that the petitioner’s family is settled in Chandigarh and that he possesses deep roots in society.

"These circumstances, coupled with his conduct on previous occasions, considerably dilute any apprehension of the applicant being a flight risk," the bench observed.

Balancing Investigative Needs With Personal Liberty

Addressing the SFIO's concerns regarding the non-submission of documents, the court acknowledged that while granting previous travel permissions, it had recorded the petitioner's undertaking to supply specific records to the investigating agency. The SFIO had alleged that the documents provided were incomplete and did not conform to commitments made during the petitioner's examination in January 2026.

Conditions Precedent For Travel Permission

The court held that while the petitioner is entitled to travel for professional growth, such liberty must be balanced with the requirement of his cooperation with the ongoing investigation. Consequently, the court made the travel permission subject to the condition that the petitioner must provide the relevant documents already sought by the investigating agency prior to his departure.

"It is directed that the applicant will furnish the details and the documents to the I.O. concerned so as to cooperate with investigation as one of the conditions of permission to travel abroad," the court held.

Strict Monetary And Procedural Safeguards Imposed

To ensure the petitioner's return, the court imposed several stringent conditions, including the requirement to furnish a Fixed Deposit Receipt (FDR) in the sum of Rs. 25 lakhs as security before the Registrar General. Additionally, the petitioner was directed to furnish a personal bond and a surety bond of like amount.

The court further mandated that the petitioner must return to India within 48 hours if his presence is required by the Investigating Officer during his travel period, with such communication being permissible via WhatsApp or Email. The petitioner is also restrained from entering into any transactions involving the relinquishment of interests in movable or immovable properties, such as shares and securities, during his stay abroad.

The court allowed the application for the interim suspension of the LOC from June 9, 2026, to June 23, 2026. The bench concluded that given the petitioner’s track record and the professional significance of the conferences, he should be permitted to travel subject to the specified safeguards and the prior submission of the required investigative documents.

Date of Decision: June 03, 2026