CAPRI GLOBAL CAPITAL LIMITED v. SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
WPMS/1614/2025 · 2025-06-25
Ravindra Maithani
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7474 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7474 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition No.1614 of 2025 (M/S)
Capri Global Capital Limited
….......Petitioner Vs. Senior Superintendent of Police, Kashipur and others
……....... Respondents Present : Ms. Taniya Kapoor, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Mahendra Singh Bisht, Brief Holder for the State/respondent nos.1 and 2.
JUDGMENT
Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
In order to enforce an order, passed under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (“the SARFAESI Act”), the petitioner had requested the respondent no.1, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Kashipur to provide police force. But, by its communication dated 22.05.2025, the Senior Superintendent of Police, District Udham Singh Nagar wrote that adequate police force is not available due to various reasons.
2.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that due to want of police force, the order under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act could not be executed and the respondent no.1, the Superintendent of Police, District Udham Singh Nagar has not provided adequate police force.
2
4.
Yesterday, when the matter was taken up, the Court requested learned State Counsel to get instructions on it.
5.
Today, learned State Counsel gives a statement that the police force is deployed on various other places. It is a sensitive issue and at a sensitive place, the police force is to be deployed, for which, a large number of police force is required. The police force would be available on 30.06.2025 in District Udham Singh Nagar and within a week, it would be provided.
6.
Learned State Counsel has tendered the written instructions, which he received in this regard. It is taken on record.
7.
In view of the statement given by the learned State Counsel, nothing survives in the writ petition. It stands disposed of accordingly.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.)
25.06.2025 Sanjay SANJAY KANOJIA Digitally signed by SANJAY KANOJIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=e50e50b49596520698eff87e0a08bbd504686 df4d1afc60f54a287831dec46fe, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=26EEB7122ED0DD23233A255DD8EC45 0A84B515A087CAEFD1B3179A7DEAE40699, cn=SANJAY KANOJIA Date: 2025.06.26 18:16:39 +05'30'