CRM-M-38852-2025 -1- 123 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-38852-2025 Date of Decision: 24.07.2025 Ranjeet Singh ..... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present: Mr. Karan Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the petitioner. Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (ORAL) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, for issuance of directions to respondent nos.1 to 3 to take necessary steps against respondents no.4 & 5, who are trying and making an attempt to forcibly take away the vehicle of the petitioner bearing registration No.HR62-A-2400 with the help of recovery agents and henchmen. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner purchased vehicle bearing registration No. HR62-A-2400 by taking loan from respondents no.4 & 5. The vehicle was financed by respondent no.4 through its Branch, i.e. respondent no.5. The financed amount was Rs.39,06,988/-, which was to be repaid in 59 monthly instalment from 02.01.2025 to 02.11.2029. The petitioner has paid substantial amount and overdue amount is Rs.86,321/- He submits that the petitioner is a bona fide person and could not pay the due instalments only on account of compelling circumstances arising due to his poor financial condition. He further contends that now the recovery agents of respondents no.4 & 5 are making desperate attempts to forcibly recover the vehicle bearing registration No.HR62-A-2400. SHARMILA DEVI 2025.07.24 19:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment PHHC CRM-M-38852-2025 -2- 3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court recently vide its judgment rendered in the case of Manager, ICICI Bank Ltd. vs. Prakash Kaur and others, 2007(2) RCR Criminal 76, deprecated and denounced the practice of forcibly taking possession of the vehicle. The observation of Hon’ble the Apex Court is as follows:- “In conclusion, we can say that we are governed by a rule of law in the country. The recovery of loans or seizure of vehicles could be done only through legal means. The bank can not employ Goondas to take possession by force.” 4. Notice of motion. 5. On asking of the Court, Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of respondents no.1 to 3. 6. Without entering upon an exercise to evaluate the evidentiary value of the documents placed on the file, I dispose of the petition with a direction to respondent no.2- Superintendent of Police, Hisar to take all necessary steps to ensure that there is no obstruction at the behest of respondent no.4 & 5 in plying of the vehicle by the petitioner. 7. It is clarified that this order shall not be taken to grant immunity to the petitioner from legal action for violation of law, if any, committed by him and the respondents are free to take legal recourse in case of their having any survival grievance. (RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 24.07.2025 JUDGE sharmila Whether Speaking/Reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No SHARMILA DEVI 2025.07.24 19:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment PHHC