- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13071 WP No. 30414 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.30414 OF 2018 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: THE CENTRAL ARECANUT AND COCOA MARKETING AND PROCESSING CO-OPERATIVE LIMITED, (CAMPCO) HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT VARANASI TOWERS, MISSION STREET MANGALURU-575 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SRI SURESH BHANDARI M. &PETITIONER (BY SRI SUYOG HERELE E., ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BIRUR POLICE THROUGH THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001 &RESPONDENT (BY SRI M. R. PATIL, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 06.06.2018 IN C.C.NO.243/2015 IN THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C. KADUR, ANNEXURE-A AND Digitally signed by MARKONAHALLI RAMU PRIYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13071 WP No. 30414 of 2018 ALLOW THE APPLICATION DATED 22.12.2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-E FOR EXCHANGING OF OLD NOTES AS PRAYED FOR. THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioner has challenged an order dated 06.06.2018 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Kadur (henceforth referred to as 'Trial Court') in C.C.No.243/2015, by which the Trial Court rejected an application filed by it pursuant to an order dated 23.11.2017 passed by this Court in W.P.No.40355/2017. 2. (i) The petitioner lodged a complaint about theft in its Society. The police arrested the accused and recovered certain currency notes based on the confession by them. The petitioner filed an application for interim custody of the currency notes. The said application was rejected by the Trial Court in terms of an order dated 06.11.2015, which was then challenged before this Court in W.P.No.2630/2016. The said writ petition was allowed directing the release of the currency - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13071 WP No. 30414 of 2018 notes to the interim custody of the petitioner. Thereafter, the currency notes were released to the interim custody of the petitioner. (ii) In the meanwhile, the Government of India introduced demonetization of Rs.500/- and Rs.1,000/- denomination. The petitioner therefore submitted a request to the Reserve Bank of India as to the procedure for exchanging the currency notes. The Reserve Bank of India in terms of a communication dated 19.07.2017 informed the petitioner that the serial numbers of the notes released to the petitioner must be mentioned in the order by the Court and a permission should be granted by the Court for exchanging the currency notes. This was then challenged by the petitioner in W.P.No.40355 of 2017. The learned Single Judge of this Court in terms of an order dated 23.11.2017, reserved liberty to the petitioner to approach the Trial Court with an appropriate application to receive back the released currency notes so that the Court could satisfy itself that the notes surrendered back by the petitioner were the very same notes which were released to the petitioner in the first instance and verify the serial numbers contained therein and pass a fresh order and while doing so, it - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13071 WP No. 30414 of 2018 shall indicate the serial number of the notes so as to enable the petitioner to represent the same to the Reserve Bank of India for the purpose of exchange. Following this order, the petitioner filed an application and surrendered the currency notes. However, the Trial Court in terms of the impugned order, rejected the application on the ground that in the PF and seizure mahazar, except mentioning the face value of the currency notes, the serial numbers were not mentioned. Therefore, it held that there is no material to ascertain that the notes surrendered by the petitioner were the same notes, which were released to him by the Court and consequently, rejected the application. (iii) The petitioner is therefore before this Court challenging the said order. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a Co-operative society and all the currency notes of Rs.500/- and Rs.1,000/- were exchanged soon after the Government of India introduced the demonetization scheme. He submits that the currency notes released by the Trial Court are the only ones that are available with it. He - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13071 WP No. 30414 of 2018 contends that if the Investigating Officer had not mentioned the serial numbers in the PF and if the Court had not mentioned them in the order releasing to the interim custody, then the petitioner cannot be penalized. He contends that these currency notes are valid and can be lawfully exchanged. He therefore, prays that a direction be issued to incorporate the serial numbers in the order releasing the notes so that they could be validly exchanged. 4. The learned High Court Government Pleader however, submitted that in the absence of proof that these notes were released to the petitioner, no indulgence can be shown to the petitioner. 5. A sum of Rs.2,51,150/- was released to the petitioner in terms of an order dated 31.05.2017, by which time the Union of India had demonetized Rs.500/- and Rs.1,000/- currency notes. The last date prescribed for exchange of currency notes was 30.12.2016. Therefore, it is more than evident that by the time the currency notes was released to the interim custody of the petitioner, the last date for exchange of currency notes had expired. Therefore, the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13071 WP No. 30414 of 2018 Trial Court while releasing the currency notes to the interim custody of the petitioner must have noted the serial numbers. However, the same was not done. The petitioner cannot be left high and dry for a mistake committed by the investigating agency and the Court in not mentioning the serial numbers of the notes in the PF and in the order releasing them to the interim custody of the petitioner. As the last date for exchange of the currency notes pursuant to the demonetization had expired by the time the notes were released to the interim custody of the petitioner, it should be construed that the notes in possession of the petitioner were the ones that were released by the Court. The notes were surrendered by the petitioner pursuant to the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.40355/2017. Consequently, the Trial court should not have raised unnecessary queries to reject the request of the petitioner to incorporate the serial numbers of the currency notes but must have passed appropriate orders incorporating the serial numbers of the notes in the order. 6. In that view of the matter, the following order is passed: - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13071 WP No. 30414 of 2018 ORDER (i) This petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 06.06.2018 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Kadur in C.C.No.243/2015 is set aside. (iii) The Trial Court is directed to release the currency notes that were surrendered by the petitioner and specifically mention the serial numbers of the currency notes in the order so that the petitioner can get the same exchanged from the Reserve Bank of India. After furnishing the order, the Reserve Bank of India shall exchange the notes without further queries. (iv) The Trial Court shall comply this within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE PMR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49