Karnataka High Court
Muthoot Finance Limited vs The State Of Karnataka on 13 November, 2024
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:46112
WP No. 30557 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 30557 OF 2024 (GM-POLICE)
BETWEEN:
MUTHOOT FINANCE LIMITED
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE
COMPANIES ACT 1956, HEAD OFFICE AT
MUTHOOT CHAMBERS,
OPP: SARITHA THEATRE COMPLEX,
BANERJEE ROAD, KOCHI - 682 018
HAVING ONE OF ITS BRANCH AT :-
934/890 AND 934/891, WARD NO.111,
GAJANANA CIRCLE,
M G ROAD, CHINTAMANI
CHIKKABALLAPURA - 563 125
REP BY ITS MANAGER / AUTHORIZED OFFICER
SRI AJUMON P GEORGE.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ANISH JOSE ANTONY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY
Digitally signed by
R HEMALATHA HOME DEPARTMENT ,
Location: HIGH VIDHANA SOUDHA,
COURT OF BENGALURU - 560 001.
KARNATAKA
2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER / POLICE SUB- INSPECTOR
CHINTAMANI TOWN POLICE STATION,
CHIKKABALLPUR, KARNATAKA - 563 125.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K.P. YOGANNA, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT 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 AND ETC.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:46112
WP No. 30557 of 2024
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
ORAL ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents.
2. The petitioner is a company registered under the
provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, and has been licensed
by the Reserve Bank of India to conduct business as a non-
banking financial institution under the provisions of Chapter-III
B of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934.
3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the
respondent -police is likely to seize the gold ornaments during
the course of enquiry/investigation following the notice issued
under Section 91 of Cr.PC. The issue involved in this petition
was examined by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.
No.10754/2023, disposed of on 6.6.2023, which referred to
W.P. No.22441/2022, disposed of on 15.11.2022. Paragraphs
2 and 3 of that order state as follows:
"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
permitted production of gold articles for
NC: 2024:KHC:46112
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. Furthermore, the co-ordinate Bench relied on the
judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. Nos. 932-
933/1974, disposed of on 11.12.1974, wherein it was ruled
that the Court should treat similar cases alike, and if relief is
granted to one litigant, it should be extended to a similarly
circumstanced litigant as well, provided there are no
derogatory circumstances.
5. Therefore, this petition also stands disposed of in
terms of the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this
Court in W.P. No. 10754/2023.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR)
JUDGE
BKM
