Karnataka High Court
Manappuram Finance Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 22 October, 2024
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:42459
WP No. 28322 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 28322 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,
TRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA -680 567
HAVING ONE OF ITS BRANCH AT:-
THALAGATTUPURA BUILDING NO.422, I FLOOR,
NEAR SMVN GROUP OF INSTITUTION,
THALAGATTUPURA P.O., KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD,
BANGALORE DT., PIN 560 062,
REP. BY AUTHORISED SIGNATORY,
AND AREA HEAD
MR. GANESAN C.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. POORNA PRASAD K.R., ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by AND:
R HEMALATHA
Location: HIGH
COURT OF 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
BANGALORE CITY, KARNATAKA-560 001.
3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
THALAGHATTAPURA POLICE STATION
BANGALORE, KARNATAKA-560 109.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K.P. YOGANNA, AGA)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:42459
WP No. 28322 of 2024
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE NOTICES BOTH DATED 21.10.2024 ISSUED U/S
94 OF THE BNSS ADDRESSED TO MANAPPURAM FINANCE
LIMITED, THE PETITIONER HEREIN, BY THE R-3 FURNISHED
AS ANNEXURE-E AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
ORAL ORDER
The learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice
for the respondents
2. The petitioner challenges the sale notice issued under
Section 91 of the Cr.P.C., calling upon the petitioner to produce
gold articles alleged to have been pledged by the accused.
3. The similar issue involved in this petition was
examined by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in
W.P.No.22441/2022 disposed of on 15.11.2022, wherein
paragraph nos. 2 and 3 of the said judgment reads as under:
"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 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
NC: 2024:KHC:42459
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. In the aforesaid said judgment, this Court categorically
held that, the Police cannot seize the gold articles, but only
summon the petitioner to produced the gold articles for
examination. Therefore, the impugned notice issued by the
respondent-Police is modified as follows:
5. The petitioner to produce the gold articles before the
respondent No.3 for examination, and upon examination, the
petitioner is at liberty to take back the gold articles, and it is made
clear that, the respondent No.3 shall not seize the gold articles
without following due process of law.
6. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of.
7. The learned Additional Government Advocate is
granted two weeks time to file memo of appearance.
Sd/-
(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR)
JUDGE
BKM
