Dismissed¶30

Mangluram Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC5 Oct 2025WPC/4318/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Alternate remedy; maintainability; Article 226 writ petition; attachment under Section 7(2); Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors’ Interests Act, 2005; Section 9 appeal to competent authority; Collector/District Magistrate Sarangarh; MJC (Criminal) No. 713/2024; FIR Crime No. 131/2024 P.S. Sarsiva; vehicle Regn. No. CG-22-Y-2729; Mahindra Finance hypothecation; Mangluram Sahu; dismissed as not maintainable; WPC No. 4318 of 2025; decided 06/10/2025; Justice Arvind Kumar Verma; NAFR flag present.

What did the court decide?

None on merits; Registry directed to return original/certified copies of annexures to learned counsel for the petitioner after retaining attested photocopies in the case record. ¶30

Mangluram Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Writ and Judicial Review | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None on merits; Registry directed to return original/certified copies of annexures to learned counsel for the petitioner after retaining attested photocopies in the case record.

¶30

Issue for consideration

Maintainability of the writ petition in view of the adequate alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 9 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors’ Interests Act, 2005 against an order passed under Section 7. +1 more

¶29

Court's answer

The Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors’ Interests Act, 2005 provides a complete and self-contained mechanism for attachment, confirmation and adjudication of property related to defaulting financial establishments; under Section 9 of the Act an appeal lies to the competent authority against an order passed under Section 7.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable because an adequate and efficacious alternative remedy exists under Section 9 of the Act; there is no good ground to entertain the writ petition at this stage.

¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur (Arvind Kumar Verma J.), WPC No. 4318 of 2025, decided 06/10/2025 (NAFR): Writ petition under Article 226 by Mangluram Sahu challenging the order dated 7.10.2024 of the Collector/competent authority (respondent No.4) in MJC (Criminal) No. 713/2024 attaching his vehicle (Regn. No. CG-22-Y-2729) under Section 7(2) of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Act. Petitioner contended the attachment was made without notice or opportunity of hearing, that he is not an accused in FIR Crime No. 131/2024, and that the vehicle was lawfully purchased under a hypothecation agreement with Mahindra Finance. Held, dismissing the petition as not maintainable: the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors’ Interests Act, 2005 provides a complete and self-contained mechanism for attachment, confirmation and adjudication; an appeal lies under Section 9 to the competent authority against an order passed under Section 7; the availability of an adequate and efficacious alternative remedy bars entertainment of the writ petition at this stage. Registry directed to return certified copies of annexures after retaining attested photocopies.

2025:CGHC:49668

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPC No. 4318 of 2025

¶6

1 - Mangluram Sahu S/o Phoolsai Sahu, Aged About 43 Years R/o Village- Bhathapara, Ward No. 18, Sarsiwa, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.)

¶7

... Petitioner(s)

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Sarsiva, Sarangarh Dist. Sarangarh Bilaigarh (C.G.)

¶10

2 - Superintendent Of Police, Sarangarh, Dist. Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.)

¶11

3 - Tahsildar Sarsiva, Dist. Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.)

¶12

4 - District Magistrate And Authority, Under Competent Authority Competent (Chhattisgarh Protection Of Depositors Interest Act, 2005) Sarangarh Dist. Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.)

¶13

... Respondent(s)

¶14

For Petitioner(s) For Respondent/State	: Shri SanjayAgrawal, Advocate : Ms. Upasna Mehta, Dy.GA

¶15

¶16

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma)

¶17

Order on Board

¶18

06/10/2025

¶19

With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.

¶20

The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assailing the legality of the order dated 7.10.2024 passed by the respondent NO.4/Collector in MJC (Criminal) No. 713/2024 whereby the petitioner’s vehicle bearing registration No. CG-22-Y-2729 has been attached under Section 7(2) of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Act, 2025.

¶21

The principal contention of the petitioner is that the impugned order has been passed without notice or opportunity of hearing despite the fact that he is not an accused in the FIR bearing Crime No. 131/2024 and that the vehicle in question was lawfully purchased under a hypothecation agreement with Mahindra Finance. It is urged that the Collector exceeded his jurisdiction and violated the mandatory procedure under Section 7(2) of the Act.

¶22

Per contra, learned State counsel submits that the impugned order has been passed strictly in accordance with Sections 4,5,6 & 7 of the Act. The Collector being the competent authority is empowered to pass an ad interim attachment of property and to refer the same to the Special Court for confirmation. It has been further submitted that the petitioner has an adequate alternate statutory remedy under Section 9 of the Act to challenge the order of attachment and therefore the present petition is not maintainable. It is pointed out that under the

¶23

¶24

statutory scheme of the Act-

¶25

Section 4 empowers the State Government to attach the money or other property of a financial establishment which has defaulted in returning deposits, in order to protect the interests of depositors.

¶26

Section 5 authorizes the State Government to appoint the Collector as the Competent authority who is empowered to exercise control over the attached property and to take all necessary steps for its management preservation.

¶27

Section 6 mandates that the State Government shall, within 30 days from the date of ad interim attachment file an application before the Special Court seeking to make the said attachment absolute or for such other orders as the Court may deem fit.

¶28

Upon consideration of the rival submissions and on perusal of the record, this Court finds that the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors’ Interests Act, 2005 provides a complete and self contained mechanism for attachment, confirmation and adjudication of property related to defaulting financial establishments. Under Section 9 of the Act, an appeal lies to the competent authority against an order passed under Section 7.

¶29

The petitioner’s grievance essentially pertains to the validity of an attachment order passed under a special enactment which is appealable under the statutory framework. This Court therefore finds no good ground to entertain the writ petition at this stage.

¶30

In view of the foregoing discussion, the writ petition is dismissed as being not maintainable on the ground of availability of an adequate and efficacious alternative remedy under Section 9 of the Chhattisgarh

¶31

¶32

Protection of Depositors’ Interests Act, 2005.

¶33

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the certified copies of the annexures filed along with the petition may kindly be returned after keeping xerox copies thereof on record.

¶34

Accordingly, the Registry is directed to return the original/certified copies of the annexures to the learned counsel for the petitioner after retaining attested photocopies of the same in the case record.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

(Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge

¶37

Digitally signed by SUGUNA SUGUNA DUBEY DUBEY Date: 2025.10.08 10:43:58 +0530

Mangluram Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mangluram Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamlesh Kumar Sangode Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Satendra Biraj Bara Vs Steel Authority of India Limited

Bobby Vs South Eastern Coalfield Limited

Sombhatt Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Alakhram Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Santosh Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh