Disposed

Manappuram Finance Ltd., v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC4 Apr 2024WP/102152/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Finance company challenged a Section 91 Cr.P.C. notice seeking gold ornaments pledged with it. Following an earlier similar writ petition, the court recorded the petitioner's undertaking to produce the ornaments when called upon, with at least two days' notice, and disposed of the petition accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of recording petitioner's undertaking to produce the gold ornaments if called upon with reasonable time of at least two days.

Manappuram Finance Ltd., Vs the State of Karnataka — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6164 WP No. 102152 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024 BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 102152 OF 2024 (GM-POLICE)

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

MANAPPURAM FINANCE LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING REGISTERED HOUSE, A.O. VALAPAD TRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA-680 567, HAVING ONE OF ITS BRANCH AT. SINDHANURU, REPRESENTED BY AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY AND LEGAL MANAGER, MR. GOTTIPATTI PADMA RAO.

¶6

…PETITIONER

¶7

(BY SRI GIRISH V. BHAT, ADVOCATE)

¶8

AND:

¶9

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.

¶10

CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN
KATTIMANI
Digitally signed byCHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN KATTIMANI
Location: HIGH COURT
OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
Date: 2024.04.05
15:54:04 +0530

¶11

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, GADAG, KARNATAKA-582101.

¶12

THE CIRCLE POLICE INSPECTOR, RON CIRCLE, NARAGUND SUB-DIVISION, GADAG, KARNATAKA-582209.

¶13

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER/ INSPECTOR OF POLICE, GAJENDRAGAD POLICE STATION, TQ: RON, GADAG, KARNATAKA-582209.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI MADANMOHAN M. KHANNUR, AGA)

¶16

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6164 WP No. 102152 of 2024

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE IN BEARING NO.CRM:20/2024 DATED 01.04.2024 ISSUED U/S 91 OF THE CR.P.C. ADDRESSED TO BRANCH MANAGER MANAPPURAM FINANCE LIMITED, THE PETITIONER HEREIN, BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3, FURNISHED AS ANNEXURE-G; ISSUE A DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ORDER OR DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.3 NOT TO TAKE ANY COERCIVE ACTION AGAINST THE PETITIONER BANK AND ITS OFFICERS IN PURSUANT TO NOTICE DATED 01.04.2024 FURNISHED AS ANNEXURE-G.

¶18

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This writ petition is filed seeking for following reliefs:

¶21

I. To quash the notice in Bearing no.CRM:20/2024 dated 01.04.2024 issued U/s 91 of the Cr.P.C. addressed to Branch Manager Manappuram Finance Limited, the Petitioner herein, by the Respondent no.3, furnished as Annexure-G.

¶22

II. Issue a direction in the nature of mandamus or order or direction directing the respondent no.3 not to take any coercive action against the petitioner bank and its officers in pursuant to notice dated 01.04.2024 furnished as Annexure-G.

¶23

Sri Girish V.Bhat, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that subject matter of writ petition was substantially similar to W.P.no.10754/2023 disposed of on 06.06.2023, wherein notice issued under Section 91 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘Cr.P.C.’) was challenged. In said petition, referring to earlier decision wherein while granting relief against seizure of gold ornaments by issuing notice under

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6164 WP No. 102152 of 2024

¶25

Section 91 of Cr.P.C., it was observed that investigating officers cannot exercise power in manner as sought and when petitioner undertakes to co-operate in investigation by producing article as and when called upon. Learned counsel offered similar undertaking and sought for allowing petition.

¶26

Reading of Section 91 of Cr.P.C. and decision cited above, would reveal that power under said provision cannot be exercised for seizure and custody in case of gold ornaments. But, where, gold ornaments were identified, marked, sealed and thereafter left into custody of petitioner, petition was disposed of by recording undertaking of petitioner to produce said gold ornaments if reasonable time of at least two days were given.

¶27

As petitioner has offered similar undertaking, writ

¶28

petition is disposed of in terms of above observations.

¶29

Sd/JUDGE

¶30

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34

¶31

CLK

Manappuram Finance Ltd., v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manappuram Finance Ltd., v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nagappa S/O Malappa Hire Kurubar Vs Ramappa S/O Pujarappa Hire Kurubar

Thippavva Alias Hemakaksi Nilugal Vs Shekappa S/O Irappa Sunkad

Sri. Ningappa S/O Govindappa Ningaraddi Vs Sri Yallappa S/O Shingadeppa Hirekumbi

Nizamuddin S/O Moinuddin Shaikh Vs the Karnataka State Board of Wakf

Abdul Rasool Mohammed Ibrahim Dharwadkar Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri Umesh S/O Hanamanth Murgod Vs Smt Maheshwari Alias Sawata W/O Umesh Murgod