High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of l/andamus declaring the notice No.132A|/CO.T.lXlDDl2}18, dt. 30-11-2018 issued by the 4th Respondent as arbitrary, illegal and without .jurisdiction and violation of Article 300-4 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the Respondent No.4 to drop further action in pursuance to notice No. '1 32A/VCO T.TX tDD t201 8. dt. 30-1 1 -2018. , a c I I -7 lA NO: 1 OF 2018 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed lrr support of the petition, the High Court rnay be pleased to suspend the notice No 132AI/CO.T.lX/DD/2018, dt. 30-11-2018 issued by the 4th Respondent ancj permit the Petitioner to continue in the premises bearing Flat No.404, Sai Prakash Residency with plinth area of 930 st. (including common area and car parking) with undivided share of land admeasuring 30 Sq. yards out of 800 Sq yards constructed on Flat No.37, 38, 52 and 53 in Sy.No.106 and 107 lotal land admeasuring 780 sq. yards situated at Kothapet Village, Uppal Mandal, L B.Nagar, Ranga District, pending disposal of above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M.V.RAJ KUMAR GABRIEL Counsel for the Respondents: SRI M.SRINIVAS, AGP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER I t t a THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.47438 OF 2018 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under ArTicle 226 of Constitution of lndia seeking the following relief: "...1o issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the notice No.132/VVCO.T.|X/DD/2018, dt. 30-11-2018 issued by the 4tt' Respondent as arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction and violation of Article 300-4 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the Respondent No.4 to drop further action in pursuance to notice No.132/WCO.T.|X/DD/2018, dt. 30-11-201 8 and pass...."

2. Heard Mr. lV.V.Raj Kumar Gabriel, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4

3.1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present writ petition has been filed challenging Nofice No.132/WCO.T.|X/DD/201 B, dated 30.1 1 .2018, which was served upon the petitioner's tenant directing the deposit of rental amounts relating to the petitioner's flat into a specified bank account as indicated in the notice. The petitioner seeks appropriate directions from this Court in this regard

3.2. lt is submitted that, according to the respondents, the subject property has been attached in C.C. No.4 of 2018, pending before the l NTR,J W-P.No.47438 of 201a Court of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. The petitioner contends that he had purchased the flat from his vendor, who is the accused in C.C. No.4 of 2018, but asserts that he has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said property since the date of purchase in 2015. This Court, by an interim order dated 03.10.2024, suspended thr: operation of the impugned notice dated 30.11.2018. He further submits that since the petitioner had purchased the property much prior to the alleged offence and has no nexus or involvement with his vendor, the issuance of the impugned notice directing the deposit of rent is wholly unjustified and unsustainable in law. Accordingly, it is prayed that the said notice be set aside

4.1 . Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on the other hand, submits that the offence in C.C. No.4 of 201t1 was registered against the pc.titioner's vendor, who is the sole accused, under the provisions of lhe Telangana Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). lt is submitted that, pursuant to the powers conferred under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act, the subject property was attached as part of the proceedings initiated against the accused. Pending adjudication of the proceedings, the impugned notice was issued to safeguard the interests of the depositors by directing deposit of rental income into the designated account // NTR,J W.P.No-47438 of 2018

4.2. lt is further submitted that the prosecution has filed Crl.lttl.P. No.1B59 of 2019 in C.C. No.4 of 2078 seeking to make the interim attachment absolute, as required under Section 7 of the Act. Since the attachment and related proceedings are being carried out in strict compliance with statutory provisions, he contend that the petitioner's prayer for setting aside the impugned notice is premature and legally untenable, warranting dismissal of the petition

5. Upon perusal of the record, it is evident that the petitioner's flat has been attached in connection with the proceedings in C. C. No.4 of 201 B under the provisions of the Acl. The Act provides for the attachment of properties of financial establishments and persons involved in fraudulent activities, with the objective of securing the interests of depositors. Sections 4 and 7 of the Act lay down the procedure for interim attachment and the process for making such attachment absolute upon confirmation by the competent court

6. As per the prosecution, the subject property constitutes part of the assets of the accused and is therefore liable for attachment. Conversely, the petitioner asserts that he is a bona fide purchaser for value without notice, having acquired the property in 2015, prior to the initiation of the criminal proceedings. The question of whether the petitioner's ownership can be protected despite such attachment must l_ + NTR,J w.P.No.47438 of201E necessarily be determined by the competent criminal court during consideration of Crl.M.P. No.1B59 of 2019.

7. lt is well settled through judicial pronouncements, such as Sfafe of lviaharashtra v. Tapas D. Neogy, (1999) 7 SCC 685, and M. Saravana v. Slale of Tamil Nadu, (2OOB) 17 SCC 325, that attachment under the Protection of Depositors Acts is subject to the principles of natural justice, and persons claiming independent ownership are entitled to be treard before the attachment is made absolute B. ln view of the statutory framework and the factual complexity involved, this Oourt deems it appropriate to direct the petitioner to seek impleadment h Crl.M.P. No.1859 of 2019 on the fik: of the learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. Upon such impleadment, the learned Sessions Judge shall consider the petitioner's claim regarding ownership and bona fides during adjudication of the petition for making the interim attachment absolute, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

9. Meanwhile, considering that this Court has already granted interim suspension of the notice dated 30.'l 1.2018, the said interim order shall continue to remain in force until disposal of Crl.M.P. No.1B59 of 2019 to protect the petitioner's interest \ L -/ 5 NTR,J W.P.No.4743E of 201E

10. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to file an appropriate petition for impleadmenl in Crl.M.P. No.1B59 of 2019 within three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Upon such filing, the learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge shall consider the same and pass suitable orders in accordance with law. The interim suspension of the notice dated 30.1 1 .2018 shall continue until disposal of the said petition ln the event that the petitioner's claim over the property is ultimately found untenable, he shall be bound by the outcome of the proceedings and liable in accordance with law. The learned Sessions Judge may also consider issuing appropriate directions to the respondents with respect to the rental amounts collected by the petitioner subsequent to issuance of the impugned notice,

11. The learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge is further directed to give priority to the disposal of the said petition and adjudicate the matter expeditiously, in the interest of justice.

12. With the above direction, this petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed ,TRUE COPY// SD/-MOHD. ISMAIL DEPUTY REGISTRAR secrok*rcea To

1. The Nrtetropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. 2. The Principal Secretary (Home), Telangana Secretariat. Hyderabad, State of Telangana. \

3. The Commissioner of Police, City Police, Hyderabad. t I 4 J3!".'#;.,:,:ffi;il:!'.. or porice, centrar crime Starion, Detective ' Ii5"ilfff:tor or Porice, wco ream No.rX, Room No 2 6 One CC to SRt M.V.RA, ,Iyf",:Fj.1""ifi il'#,H-;,;'::Ti:[:.J:',J:l 8. Two CD Copies y- BSR BS \ t ,,1, CCS DD. Telangana at i a a HIGH COURT DATED: 0811t012025 ORDER WP.No.4743E of 2018 :- 1H t-' S T,1 I6 l ^\ 28 u:t ?n25 :\ l) ,) Y l I o n , I DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS \/ olvr' ( I a I a