Karnataka High Court Directs Police to Issue Look Out Circular in Dowry and Cruelty Case

Karnataka High Court Orders Police to Issue Look Out Circular in Dowry Case

The Karnataka High Court on October 12, 2026, directed police to take steps for issuing a Look Out Circular against a husband accused of dowry harassment and cruelty. Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde passed the interim order in Mrs. K v. State of Karnataka & Anr., reversing an earlier decision by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate who had rejected the wife's application for an LOC.

The husband faces charges under Sections 85, 352, and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. He works in France but is currently in India to reissue a lost passport. The bench directed hand delivery of the order to police and scheduled the case for hearing two weeks later.

Magistrate's rejection and High Court review

The wife initially sought an LOC from the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. That application was rejected, prompting her to petition the High Court. The magistrate's refusal to issue the circular, despite allegations of dowry and cruelty, led Justice Hegde to intervene.

The charges invoke the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, which replaced the Indian Penal Code. Section 85 covers cruelty by a husband or his relatives. Sections 352 and 351(2) address criminal intimidation and criminal force. The Dowry Prohibition Act charges indicate allegations of dowry demands or acceptance—conduct prohibited for nearly 65 years under Indian law.

How a Look Out Circular works

A Look Out Circular is a preventive measure that alerts immigration authorities and airport officials to detain a person if they attempt to travel. It does not amount to arrest but flags the system to prevent the accused from leaving the country or evading court jurisdiction.

Justice Hegde's direction overrides the lower court's decision. The High Court found sufficient grounds to believe the accused posed a flight risk or might evade legal process. His current presence in India for passport reissuance may have influenced the court's decision to act immediately.

The interim order remains in force until the next hearing, two weeks from October 12, 2026. The court may then convert it into a final direction or modify its terms based on further submissions.

Dowry offences in Indian law

Downry-related crimes rank among the most frequently prosecuted offences under Indian law. The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, criminalises the giving, taking, or abetting of dowry. Section 3 makes it an offence to give or abet the giving of dowry; Section 4 penalises demand, acceptance, or abetting of acceptance.

Cruelty by a husband or his relatives, now covered under Section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, persists in matrimonial disputes. Courts recognise that harassment over dowry often manifests as cruelty within the statute's meaning, encompassing both physical and mental harm.

Downry offences and cruelty charges frequently intersect in matrimonial cases. Women's rights organisations and the judiciary have consistently held that dowry demands, often accompanied by harassment or threats, violate the wife's fundamental rights and dignity.

Why courts issue Look Out Circulars

Look Out Circulars serve as a critical tool when investigating serious crimes, particularly where the accused has access to international travel or is likely to abscond. The circular reaches all ports of entry and exit—airports, seaports, and land borders—to prevent the accused from leaving the country.

In dowry and cruelty cases, an LOC proves crucial because family members often possess means to flee. The accused's employment abroad makes the flight risk acute. Justice Hegde's decision reflects the court's assessment that the charges' gravity and circumstances warrant such a measure.

The investigating officer typically applies to the police commissioner or designated authority for an LOC. Here, Justice Hegde's order directs police to take steps for issuance, requiring them to process the application immediately.

Why the magistrate's decision was reversed

The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate's rejection of the LOC application raises questions about the lower court's reasoning. While the order does not detail the magistrate's grounds, the High Court's reversal suggests the magistrate's decision was erroneous or circumstances had changed by the time the matter reached the High Court.

Hand delivery of the order ensures police receive it directly and cannot claim ignorance of the court's direction. This procedural safeguard guarantees compliance. The two-week posting allows a follow-up hearing where the court can verify whether the LOC has been issued and whether further steps are necessary.

The case demonstrates the importance of approaching the High Court when lower courts' decisions appear inadequate or circumstances warrant immediate intervention. Article 226 of the Constitution empowers the High Court to issue directions to authorities to perform their duties, exercised here to protect the wife's interests.