Karnataka High Court
Manappuram Finance Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 2 August, 2024
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:30660
WP No. 20920 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 20920 OF 2024 (GM-POLICE)
BETWEEN:
MANAPPURAM FINANCE LTD
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES
ACT 1956, HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT
MANAPURAM HOUSE, A O VALAPAD, THRISSUR
DISTRICT KERALA - 680567
HAVING ONE OF ITS BRNACH
AT 818/72, 2ND FLOOR, KMS COMPLEX,
FIRST FLOOR CANARA BANK, N H 13 MAIN ROAD,
KARNATAKA, DAVANGERE CHANNAGIRI - 577213
REP BY ITS AREA HEAD
THE AUTHORISED OFFICER SELVAM C.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ANISH JOSE ANTONY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Digitally signed by B
K BY ITS SECRETARY,
MAHENDRAKUMAR
Location: HIGH HOME DEPARTMENT,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE-560 001.
2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER /
POLICE INSPECTOR
CHANNAGIRI POLICE STATION
CHANANGIRI, DAVANGERE DISTRICT
KARNATAKA -577 213.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SHAMANTH NAIK, HCGP)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:30660
WP No. 20920 of 2024
THE INTERFERENCE BY THE RESPONDENTS IN PETITIONERS
BUSINESS FOR FORCEFULLY SEIZING THE GOLD ARTICLES
PLEDGED BY IT COSTUMERS IS ARBITRARY AND IS IN
VIOLATION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS GUARANTEED UNDER
ARTICLE 14 AND 19(1)(g) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IN
THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
ORAL ORDER
The learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice
for the respondents.
2. The petitioner seeks a declaration that the interference
by the respondents in the petitioner's business, specifically the
forceful seizure of gold articles pledged by its customers, is arbitrary
and in violation of fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g)
of the Constitution of India.
3. The issue involved in this petition was examined by a
coordinate Bench of this Court in WP No. 10754/2023 (dated
06.06.2023). In that case, relying on the decision in WP No.
22441/2022 (dated 15.11.2022), it was held as follows in paragraphs
2 and 3 of the said judgment:
"2. A perusal of the order passed on 14.10.2022, the
notice does not in effect indicate anything contrary to
what is passed. The only observation is that the writ
petition is dismissed and therefore, the gold articles are
directed to be produced for investigation. This Court has
NC: 2024:KHC:30660
permitted production of gold articles for investigation,
but the Investigating Officer cannot seize the same.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that
he is co-operating with the investigation and indication
of dismissal of the petition should not lead to seizure of
the gold articles. This Court has clearly held that the
gold articles cannot be seized and therefore, the
Investigating Officer cannot seize the gold articles, but
can examine the same by summoning it for the purpose
of investigation."
4. Therefore, it is expedient to dispose of the writ petition in
terms of the order passed in the aforesaid petition.
5. The relief granted to the litigant in the cognate writ
petition is extended to the petitioner herein as well, mutantis
mutandis.
Sd/-
(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR)
JUDGE
BKM
