Karnataka High Court
Muthoot Fincorp Limited vs The State Of Karnataka on 15 November, 2024
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:46550
WP No. 30771 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 30771 OF 2024 (GM-POLICE)
BETWEEN:
MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT 1956
HEAD OFFICE AT PUNNEN ROAD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001
HAVING ONE OF ITS BRANCH AT
GROUND FLOOR, LAXMI RESIDENCY,
OPPOSITE NAGABRAHMA TEMPLE
ALAKE MANGALORE - 575 003
REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER/MANAGER
SRI PRASHANTH KUMAR.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ANISH JOSE ANTONY., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Digitally signed by BY ITS SECRETARY,
R HEMALATHA HOME DEPARTMENT,
Location: HIGH VIDHANA SOUDHA,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER / POLICE INSPECTOR,
KAVOOR POLICE STATION, KAVOOR,
MANGALURU - 575 015.
...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
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:46550
WP No. 30771 of 2024
VIOLATION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS GUARANTEED UNDER
ARTICLE 14 AND 19(1)(g) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 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
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
NC: 2024:KHC:46550
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. 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
