Look Out Circular Prevents Return to Britain
An Indian-origin British doctor working as a consultant with the National Health Service (NHS) has been stranded in Mumbai for nearly three months after the Mumbai Police issued a Look Out Circular (LOC) against him. The action reportedly followed a social media post allegedly targeting Prime Minister Narendra Modi, restricting the doctor from leaving India.
Petition Filed Before Bombay High Court
Dr. Sangram Patil has approached the Bombay High Court seeking relief. The court is currently examining the legality of the FIR registered against him and the validity of the LOC that has prevented him from returning to the United Kingdom to resume his professional duties.
FIR Over December 14 Facebook Post
The case stems from a Facebook post allegedly made by Dr. Patil on December 14, 2025. A complaint was filed the same day by a BJP functionary, following which an FIR was registered on December 18 at N.M. Joshi Marg police station in Lower Parel. Police alleged that the post contained objectionable and defamatory material capable of disturbing public harmony.
Detained at Mumbai Airport
Dr. Patil, who holds British citizenship, had travelled to India on a tourist visa for a brief visit. However, when he arrived at Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport on January 10, 2026, he was detained and questioned by the Mumbai Police Crime Branch. His departure was subsequently blocked under the LOC.
Police Allegations in Court Affidavit
According to an affidavit filed by Mumbai Police, the doctor allegedly circulated content promoting disharmony and uploaded derogatory and scandalous material about the Prime Minister. Authorities further claimed he attempted to bypass Indian law enforcement by using foreign IP addresses and continued posting inflammatory content even after the investigation began.
Doctor Denies Charges, Claims Cooperation
In a rejoinder filed before the High Court, Dr. Patil denied all allegations. He stated that he had cooperated with investigators, appeared before the Crime Branch when summoned, and that no custodial interrogation had been sought. He also contended that the post neither directly named nor exclusively identified the Prime Minister.
Allegations of Criminalising Dissent
The doctor argued that authorities were attempting to criminalise political speech and justify what he termed an “illegal LOC.” He further maintained that he had acknowledged authorship of the post and provided both documentary and oral evidence, denying claims that he continued to publish objectionable content after the FIR was lodged.
Matter Listed for Further Hearing
The High Court is scheduled to hear the matter further on February 17. The court’s decision will determine whether the FIR and travel restrictions can legally stand or whether the UK-based consultant will be allowed to return to his professional commitments in Britain.
