MUTHOOT FINANCE LTD. Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The grievance of the petitioner is as to police seizing certain gold articles on the suspicion of the same being involved in a crime. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his client's company has been running the business inter alia of selling & buying of gold ornaments. If the said articles are bought bona fide, the police cannot barge into the premises and take away the same on the pretext that they are needed for investigation in some offence.

(2.) Petitioner has moved an application in I.A. No.1/2023 supported by an affidavit seeking leave of the Court stating certain new facts that have happened after the filing of petition. The said application is heard along with the main matter as if it is a part of the pleadings and this has been done with the consent of Bar.

(3.) Learned AGA appearing for the respondent opposes the petition inter alia contending that investigation has been explained by the Apex Court in M.T.ENRICA LEXIE vs. DORAMMA, (2012) 6 SCC 760 at Paragraph 14, as under: