Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
WRIT PETITION No.54605 /2015(GM-Police)
BETWEEN:
M/s.Attica Gold Private Limited, Having registered office No.11/4, Suvarna Bhavan, Ground Floor, Queens Road, Shivajinagar, Bangalore – 560 052, Represented by its PRO Shri Srikanth V. Nalige
… Petitioner
(By Shri.Shyam Sundar.M.S, Advocate )
AND:
The State of Karnataka by The Station House Officer, Vijayanagar Police Station, Bangalore and another – 560 040.
… Respondent
(By Shri Vijay Kumar A. Patil, AGA)
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned notices dated 30.11.2011 and 02.12.2015 vide annex-A & C to the Writ Petition and etc.,
- 2 -
This Writ Petition coming on for preliminary hearing this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate. The petition coming on for preliminary hearing is considered for final disposal.
The petitioner claims to be a legal entity engaged in the business of purchasing and selling gold and gold ornaments. The petitioner claims to have the necessary licences, permissions, registrations as required under law and has been operating legal business. He pays Income Tax, Value Added Tax, Sales Tax etc., to the Government and it has a staff, who are wholly dependent on its business for their livelihood. It is not in dispute that the petitioner assists persons, who have pledged their gold with pawn brokers and when they fail in redeeming the gold so pledged, the pawn brokers, normally
- 3 - auction the gold. The persons, who have pledged the gold thereby lose their valuable property. The petitioner has devised a scheme where persons, who have pledged the gold approach the petitioner and furnish details of the pledge so made. The petitioner along with the pledgee goes to the pawn broker, redeems the gold and thereafter gives the pledgee an option of either selling the gold to the petitioner or pledging the same with it, on such other terms and conditions.
It transpires that the police while investigating a criminal case in Crime No.630/2015, for offences punishable under Sections 143, 148, 341, 307 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, had called upon the petitioner to produce gold, weighing about 197.04 grams, which was said to be stolen property, which the accused is said to have initially pledged with a pawn broker and from whom it was redeemed and in turn sold to the petitioner. The petitioner had replied replying to the notice issued under Section 91 of the Code of Criminal
- 4 - Procedure, 1973, to the effect that said gold was no longer with it as it had already sold the same to a third party. Inspite of which a further notice having been issued calling upon the petitioner to produce the gold or that further action would be initiated against it, the petitioner is before this Court.
Though the petitioner had replied to the notice, it was incumbent on a representative to appear before the Investigating Officer and make a statement. Therefore, though there is no cause of action for this petition, the fact that the petitioner has not appeared before the Investigating Officer inspite of two notices would require the petitioner to appear before the Investigating Officer and reiterate the reply that it had furnished to the notice. This is a necessary step in investigation. Therefore, the petitioner shall not shirk its responsibility in responding to the notice. However, the respondents are restrained from taking any summary action without recourse to the due process of law, if the petitioner is suspected of having
- 5 - committed any alleged offence. With that observation, the petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer and make a statement. It is for the respondents to thereafter take any action in accordance with law. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. The learned Government Advocate is permitted to file his memo of appearance within two weeks.
Sd/-
JUDGE
nd/-