SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(AP) 1261

Andhra Pradesh High Court
B.V.S.P. Choudary - Appellant
Vs.
Station House Officer, Secunderabad and others. - Respondent
WP No.5828 of 2007
Decided on: Twenty Seventh Day of December, 2007

Advocates appeared:By Telegram, Counsel for the Petitioner; Government Pleader for Home, Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 6; B. Nalin Kumar for M.P. Ugle (SC for RBI), Counsel for the Respondent No.7; A. Rejasekher Reddy, (Solicitor General of India), Counsel for the Respondent No.8.

Headnote:(A) Recovery and Debt Laws- Debts due under Credit Cards- Use of criminal force or harassment by banks or recovery agents for that purpose. Affected cardholders will have a right to take recourse to law by lodging complaint with police or moving competent criminal Court under Section 190 and 200 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Reserve Bank of India has taken corrective measure by issuing guidelines to commercial banks to curb illegal activities being adopted by banks in the matter [Para 8]

       (B) Constitution of India-Article 14- Recovery of any amounts due from customers of banks should be by a method known to law or a fair practice of debt collection, which has the approval of the Reserve Bank of India. RBI guidelines observing that the banks or the recovery agents should not resort to intimidation or harassment of any kind, either verbal or physical, against any person in their debt collection efforts, including acts intended to humiliate publicly or intrude the privacy of the credit cardholders family members, referees and friends, making threatening and anonymous calls or making false and misleading representations. [Para 8]

A GOPAL REDDY, J:- The telegram iated 16.3.2007 sent by one Sri B. V.S.P. Choudary, claiming himself to be the President of All India Credit Card Members Association, A.P. Unit, Hydrabad to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of this Court complaining that the recovery gundas/representatives of HDFC Bank have illegally detained Prof. C.L.N. Murthy, Scientist, IICT, Uppal, Hyderabad and that the Station House Officers of Mahankali Police Station and Chikkadapalli Police Station have illegally acted in that regard, was taken up as writ petition.

2. The petitioner has sent two telegrams on 16.3.2007. The contents of the telegrams are that the petitioner has received a phone call from Prof. C.L.N. Murthy, Scientist at IICT Uppal stating that some recovery gundas/representatives of HDFC Bank followed him from his residence and forcibly kidnapped him and to rescue him, that recovery gundas had brought C.L.N. Murthy to Mahankali Police Station, that on his (petitioner) telephoning to the police service, he was asked to contact the Mahankali Police Station, that he went to Mahankali Police Station and met C.L.N. Murthy to rescue him from the clutches of police, that Sri P. Narayana, the Circle Inspector of Police, Mahankali Police Station colluded with the HDFC recovery gundas and forced him to sign on blank aJ.1d written papers, that when he enquired the C.I. of Police, Mahankali Police Station, he abused him in filthy language and threatened him by taking out his service revolver stating that he will encounter him and nobody can do anything as he is co-brother of Minister Marappa and pushed him out of the police station, that after half an hour, he received a call from Murthy stating that he has been taken to Chikkadapalli Police Station and he does not know the whereabouts of Murthy and, therefore, prayed to take suitable action against the, concerned and to protect the life of the alleged detenu and his family members.

3. In response to the Rule Nisi, Sri M Narayana, Inspector of Police, Mahankali Police Station filed a counter-affidavit denying the allegations that Sri C.L.N. Murthy was v kidnapped by the recovery gundas of HDFC n Bank and handed over him and also the n, police forcing the petitioner as well as the t1 scientist to sign on blank papers and he b colluding with the recovery gundas of HDFC n Bank and threatening the petitioner to kill in c an encounter by pointing out his service b revolver. It is further averred that no case u whatsoever was registered at their a police station against the bank authorities by Sri C.L.N. Murthy nor the HDFC Bank authorities approached the police to lodge 11 a complaint against Sri C.L.N. Murthy. Sri C.L.N. Murthy himself approached the r police station and orally stated that he has I to pay some dues to the HDFC Bank and t for recovery of the same, the bank authorities t are harassing him and requested to take necessary action. As the alleged offence falls within the limits of Chikkdapally Police Station, Sri C.L.N. Murthy was advised to approach the 2nd respondent for taking necessary action and accordingly on the complaint of Sri Murthy, a case was registered against the HDFC Bank authorities and investigated into.

4. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Mahankali Police Station, Secunderabad also filed a counter stating that a case in Cr.No.148 of 2007 under Sections 448, 384, 342, 323 and 506 IP.C was registered on the file of Chikkadapally Police Station and the same is pending investigation.

5. The learned Government Pleader for Home submitted that the police after completion of the investigation into the case laid charge-sheet against the persons accused in the crime before the competent Magistrate having jurisdiction over the matter.

6. Sri Nalin Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the impleaded respondent No.7 - Reserve Bank of India, submitted that on coming to know of the harassment being meted out to credit card-holders of various banks at the hands of the representatives employed by the b






Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top