Enterprises offering loans against gold jewellery always run the risk of accepting stolen articles and therefore they cannot question the power of police to seize jewels in appropriate cases, the Madras High Court Bench here has said.
Justice P.N. Prakash made the observation while disposing of a writ petition filed by the manager of Muthoot Finance, Bazzar Branch, Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi district, to forbear Kovilpatti West police from seizing certain jewels pledged with the company.
Claiming that his company thoroughly ascertained ownership of jewels before offering loans, the petitioner accused the police of collecting details of jewels pledged with it frequently and connecting them with theft cases by recording false confession statements from the accused.
Replying to it, the judge said: “This is indeed a very grey area in which it is dangerous for this court to give any finding this way or that way. All over the world, enterprises that give jewel loans run the risk by accepting stolen articles from persons whose credentials will arouse least suspicion.
“Only when the original owner lodges a police complaint, truth will surface. The power of the police to seize the articles of crime from the bailee cannot be disputed. When the bailer himself has no title, the bailee cannot perfect the title by claiming any lien over the property.”
In the same breath, the judge said that it was also not uncommon for the police to indiscriminately seize articles from a bailee under the guise of investigation. “Under such circumstances, the bailee also requires protection from police highhandedness,” he added.
Pointing out that the present case was not related to theft, robbery or dacoity, the judge said it was a simple case of a woman having been deceived by her neighbours who reportedly borrowed her jewellery on the pretext of attending a marriage function and made money by pledging them. Hence, he directed the petitioner to submit the jewels directly before a Judicial Magistrate, who had refused to accept a final report filed by the police in the case due to the latter’s failure to seize the jewellery, and undertake not to auction them until the criminal case is disposed of.
Justice P.N. Prakash made the observation while disposing of a writ petition filed by the manager of Muthoot Finance, Bazzar Branch, Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi district, to forbear Kovilpatti West police from seizing certain jewels pledged with the company.
Claiming that his company thoroughly ascertained ownership of jewels before offering loans, the petitioner accused the police of collecting details of jewels pledged with it frequently and connecting them with theft cases by recording false confession statements from the accused.
Replying to it, the judge said: “This is indeed a very grey area in which it is dangerous for this court to give any finding this way or that way. All over the world, enterprises that give jewel loans run the risk by accepting stolen articles from persons whose credentials will arouse least suspicion.
“Only when the original owner lodges a police complaint, truth will surface. The power of the police to seize the articles of crime from the bailee cannot be disputed. When the bailer himself has no title, the bailee cannot perfect the title by claiming any lien over the property.”
In the same breath, the judge said that it was also not uncommon for the police to indiscriminately seize articles from a bailee under the guise of investigation. “Under such circumstances, the bailee also requires protection from police highhandedness,” he added.
Pointing out that the present case was not related to theft, robbery or dacoity, the judge said it was a simple case of a woman having been deceived by her neighbours who reportedly borrowed her jewellery on the pretext of attending a marriage function and made money by pledging them. Hence, he directed the petitioner to submit the jewels directly before a Judicial Magistrate, who had refused to accept a final report filed by the police in the case due to the latter’s failure to seize the jewellery, and undertake not to auction them until the criminal case is disposed of.
Comments
Post a Comment