“The contention advanced on behalf of the respondent, namely, that the learned Magistrate did not record any satisfaction before directing the warrant to be issued leaves us unconvinced. The requirement of recording of satisfaction that the affidavit discloses the essential facts stipulated by the proviso to Section 14 has come in only after insertion of the proviso in the year 2013. This aspect of the matter has been considered by this Court in Standard Chartered Bank vs. V. Noble Kumar and others (supra) and the view has been taken that the learned Magistrate at the stage of exercising jurisdiction under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act was not specifically required to record any satisfaction on record the existence of any particular fact. Even otherwise if the above proposition, prior to the insertion of the proviso to Section 14 in the year 2013, is to be tested from the standpoint of every judicial order being based upon and prompted by requisite satisfaction of the Court, it must be acknowledged that the existence of satisfaction for a species of judicial orders is not dependent on the existence of reasons recorded in the order itself. The order under Section 14 of the Act, prior to the amendment belongs to the aforesaid specie of judicial orders.”
