Back
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
S SUNIL DUTT YADAV, J
MUTHOOT FINANCE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. allegation of wrongful interference in business. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. the petitioner’s undertaking regarding pledged articles. (Para 5) |
| 3. court decision based on procedural compliance. (Para 6) |
ORAL ORDER
SHO AND OTHERS, [Criminal Appeal No.1026 of 2024]
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner draws attention of this Court to the directions of the Apex Court, which order is annexed at Annexure-H.
5. The order of the Apex Court passed in Crl.A.No.1026 of 2024 at paragraph Nos.3, 4 & 5 reads as follows:
4. There is an additional affidavit dated
Paragraph '4' of the said affidavit incorporating the undertaking, which reads thus:
(i) That the Petitioner shall produce the pledged ornaments as and when called by the Investigating Officer/Respondent No. 1 for inspection of the same, and also permit taking photographs and making the panchnama, if so required.
53/2021 dated 09.02.2021.
5. The undertaking of the petitioner is taken on record. A copy of the undertaking shall be forwarded by the Registry to the Trial Court.
Accordingly, petition is disposed off Sd/-
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
