Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sushil Kumar vs State Of Punjab And Others on 22 March, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:041913
2024:PHHC:041913
113 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-14834-2024
Date of decision: 22.03.2024
Sushil Kumar ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Present: Mr. Karan Bhardwaj, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl.A.G., Punjab.
HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL)
The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
seeking issuance of directions to respondents No.1 to 3 to take necessary steps
to the effect that there is no obstruction in plying of the vehicle of the petitioner
and to take appropriate legal action against respondents No.4 & 5 who are
trying and making an attempt to forcibly take away the vehicle of the petitioner
with the help of recovery agents and henchmen.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner purchased vehicle
bearing registration No.PB 06 AL 0072 by taking loan from respondents No. 4
and 5. The vehicle was financed by respondent No. 4 through its Branch i.e.
respondent No.5. The financed amount was Rs. 45,50,000/- and the same was
to be repaid in 60 monthly installments of Rs.92,896/- commencing from
20.12.2022 to 20.11.2027. The account summary prepared by petitioner is
annexed as Annexure P-1. The petitioner has paid substantial amount, however,
the respondents are adamant to recover the vehicle forcibly only because few
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:041913
2024:PHHC:041913
installments are due which has occurred due to restructuring of loan which was
done without petitioner's consent and without informing him. On 18.01.2024,
the petitioner went to take the statement of account of his vehicle and requested
the Branch Manager that he is trying to make the balance payment at the earlies
but because of some financial difficulty, he could not arrange the money to pay
the installments. However, the Branch Manager asked him to part the vehicle
with the Company or else they would recover it forcible through their recovery
agents. This reflects that petitioner is a bonafide person and could not pay the
installments only on account of his financial difficulty. Learned counsel for the
petitioner further contends that now the recovery agents of respondents No. 4
and 5 are making desperate attempts to recover the vehicle bearing registration
No. PB 06 AL 0072.
3. The Hon'ble Supreme Court recently vide its judgment dated
26.02.2007 in case titled as 'Manager, ICICI Bank Ltd. vs. Prakash Kaur and
others' deprecated and denounced the practice of forcibly taking possession.
The observation of Hon'ble Apex Court is as follows:-
"In conclusion, we can say that we are governed by a rule of
law in the country. The recovery of loans or seizure of vehilces could be
done only through legal means. The bank can not employ Goondas to take
possession by force."
4. Notice of motion.
5. Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl.A.G., Punjab puts in appearance on
receipt of advance notice of the present petition.
6. With the consent of the parties, the present case is taken up for
final disposal in view of settled law. Respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:041913
2024:PHHC:041913
Police, District Pathankot is directed to take all necessary steps to ensure that
there is no obstruction in plying of the vehicle of the petitioner at the behest of
respondents No. 4 and 5.
7. Learned State counsel submits that it is the duty of the State to
protect the life and liberty of every citizen and to ensure that the rule of law is
maintained.
8. Disposed of in above terms.
(HARPREET SINGH BRAR)
JUDGE
22.03.2024
Neha
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
