- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10073 WP No. 27824 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 27824 OF 2024 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: SMT. R. DIVYA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, W/O. SRI. K. RAVICHANDRA, NO.510, KALAMMA ROAD, RAMASWAMY PALYA, BANGALORE-560 033. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. H. VASANTH KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BANK OF BARODA NO.208, 5TH CROSS, 1ST MAIN ROAD, DOMLUR LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 071, REPRESENTED BY AUTHORIZED OFFICER/ SENIOR MANAGER. 2. SRI. V. KAMALAKANNAN S/O. SRI. VELUNATHAN, AGE 50 YEARS, Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10073 WP No. 27824 of 2024 RESIDING AT NO.TF 5, 3RD FLOOR, 10TH CROSS, R.R. NAGAR, IDEAL HOME, BHARATHI PETROL BUNK, BENGALURU-560 098. 3. SMT. K. BHARATHIPRIYA W/O. KAMALAKANNAN, AGE 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.TF 5, 3RD FLOOR, 10TH CROSS, R.R. NAGAR, IDEAL HOME, BHARATHI PETROL BUNK, BENGALURU-560 098. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHETTY VIGNESH SHIVARAM, ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDERS DATED 01.08.2024 PASSED BY THE 11 ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE BANGALORE IN CRL.MISC.NO.50325/2024 AS PER ANNEXURE-D. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10073 WP No. 27824 of 2024 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner filed this petition challenging the order passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 50325 of 2024 dated 01.08.2024 passed by the learned 11th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru. 2. This court vide order dated 21.10.2024 granted an interim order subject to the petitioner depositing ₹20,00,000/- within 4 weeks from today, failing which, the interim order granted automatically stands vacated. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner has not deposited ₹20,00,000/- as per the order dated 21.10.2024. 4. Admittedly, the impugned order passed by the 11th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Board, Bengaluru, is an appealable under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. The petitioner without exhausting an equal efficacious remedy filed this writ petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10073 WP No. 27824 of 2024 Hence, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable in view of the proposition laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rikhab Chand Jain vs. Union of India in Civil Appeal No.6719/2012 disposed of on 12.11.2025. 5. In view of the same, I do not find any grounds to entertain the writ petition. 6. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER i. The writ petition is dismissed. ii. A liberty is reserved to the petitioner to challenge the impugned order before the DRT within 30 days from today. iii. If the petitioner approaches the DRT within 30 days, the petitioner is entitled for the benefit under Section 14 of the limitation Act, 1963. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10073 WP No. 27824 of 2024 iv. Pending IA(s), if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SKS