MUTHOOT FINANCE LTD. Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner-company is knocking at the doors of Writ Court, for assailing the orders of requisition by the jurisdictional police to produce certain ornaments of gold. These orders have been made on the premises that the accused - maid servant of the First Informant having thieved these articles, has pledged the same with the petitioner- company.

(2.) Learned AGA appearing for the respondents oppose the petitions contending that the police in the course of investigation have got powers u/s 91 read with sec. 102 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to direct any person to produce anything, article or document and if such production takes place, that would be compliance with the requisition in terms of sub-sec. (2) of sec. 94 . Whether such an article is required for the investigation, or not, is left to the wisdom of the investigating agency and therefore, the pawnee cannot object to such a requisition keeping in view the wide definition of investigation given u/s 2(h) of the Code as interpreted by the Apex Court in the case of H.N.Rishbud & Inder Singh Vs. State of Delhi, 1955 SCR (1) 1156; learned AGA also points out that once the petitioner produces these articles, the same shall be reported by the police to the jurisdictional Magistrate and it is open to the producer of the same to seek their return by invoking Secs. 451 / 457 of Cr.P.C.; so contending, he seeks dismissal of the Writ Petition.

(3.) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Petition Papers, this court declines indulgence in the matter broadly agreeing with the submission of learned AGA inasmuch as the subject articles in the considered opinion of the investigating officer may be required for the investigation in progress. Once the petitioner produces the same before the said officer, the report shall be sent to the Magistrate before whom the petitioner can move an application for their return, as rightly submitted by learned AGA.