IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 10865 OF 2025 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

1 . MANAPPURAM FINANCE LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT MANAPURAM HOUSE, A.O. VALAPAD TRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA -680 567 HAVING ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT KUDLU SOMASUNDARAPALYA NO. 48/7, 5^TH FLOOR KUDLU SOMASUNDARAPALYA ROAD BENGALURU-560102.

DULY REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE/

LEGAL MANAGER MR. SHANMUGAM .A Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA ...PETITIONER Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA (BY SRI. ANISH JOSE ANTONY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER HULIMAVU PS REPRESENTED BY HCPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE-560 001.

2 . SRIVATSA KUMAR S/O T.K. SRINIVASAN FLAT NO. 3023, PRESTIGE NOTINGAL HILL APARTMENT, B.G ROAD, HULIMAVU BANGALORE-560 076.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAHUL RAI, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALLING FOR THE RECORDS OF ANNEXURE-A ORDER DATED 19.12.2020 IN CC NO. 10049/2018 PASSED BY THE HONBLE V ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE AND QUASH THE SAME TO AN EXTENT OF MAKING THE INTERIM CUSTODY OF ARTICLES SEIZED IN PF NO. 88/2017 GRANTED TO THE 2^ND RESPONDENT MAKING ABSOLUTE AND FOR FURTHER DIRECT V ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE TO PASS ORDERS UNDER SECTION 452 OF CRPC IN CC NO. 10049/2018 WITH REGARD TO THE ARTICLES SEIZED IN PF NO. 88/2017 FOR ITEM NO. 2 TO 4 DE NOVO AFTER HEARING THE PETITIONERS WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE MONTH IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN, AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

ORAL ORDER

The captioned petition challenges the order dated

19.12.2020 passed in C.C.No.10049/2018, whereby the learned Magistrate, after recording the settlement in the Lok-Adalat, made the interim custody of certain gold articles (seized in P.F.No.88/2017) absolute in favour of respondent No.2.

2. The petitioner, a Non-Banking Financial Company (NBFC) which advanced loans against pledged gold seeks that the said portion of the order (making interim custody absolute) be set aside and that the matter be remitted to the learned Magistrate to hold an enquiry under Section 452 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 ('Cr.P.C.' for short) and to pass appropriate orders after giving notice to all persons claiming interest.

3. The petitioner is an established NBFC with nationwide presence. The petitioner advanced loan to the accused/Papubai and Madesha against pledges of gold ornaments. A complaint came to be registered in Crime No.179/2017 alleging offence under Section 381 of IPC. The Investigating Officer issued notice under Section 91 Cr.P.C. and seized the gold articles (recorded as P.F.No.88/2017). Interim custody of the seized articles was given during investigation and, following settlement before the Lok-Adalat, the trial Court made the interim custody absolute in favour of respondent No.2, without hearing the petitioner. The petitioner contends it is a bona fide pledgee and has a civil right/claim to possession which was not adjudicated.

4. The petitioner's counsel reiterating the grounds has placed reliance on the following judgments:

1) Nevada Properties (P) Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, (2019) 20 SCC 119;

2) N.Madhavan vs. State of Kerala - (1979) 4 SCC 1;

3) Hiralal Babulal Soni vs. State of Maharashtra - 2025 SCC Online SC 437;

4) Yes Bank vs. State of UP and Others - Criminal Appeal No.207/2023;

5) Muthoot Fincorp Ltd. vs. The SHO and Others -

Criminal Appeal No.1026/2024;

6) Shimoga District Central Co-operative Bank Limited, Shimoga vs. Karnataka Food and Civil Supplies Corporation, Bangalore - 2003 SCC Online Kar 831;

7) Kasturi Lal Ralia Ram Jain vs. State of UP - 1964 SCC Online SC 38;

8) Union Territory of Ladakh vs. Jammu & Kashmir National Co