Bombay High Court

JANA SMALL FINANCE BANK LTD THR ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER MOHAMMED ABDUL KHALID MOHD. ABDUL RAHIMversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERES

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The petition is allowed; the Court Commissioner must take possession of the secured assets and hand them over to the petitioner.

Summary

Jana Small Finance Bank Ltd filed a writ petition seeking repossession of secured assets after the borrowers, Atul Mulik and Shital Atul Mulik, allegedly broke the lock and took illegal possession of the property. The bank relied on an order dated 28.03.2025 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. The High Court, citing its earlier decision in Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra (Writ Petition No.6805/2023), allowed the petition. It directed the Court Commissioner to take possession of the assets within eight weeks and hand them over to the bank, with police protection as arranged by the concerned police station. The petition was disposed in the bank’s favour and the matter was listed for compliance on 07.12.2026.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to repossess the secured assets under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act after illegal trespass by the borrowers.
Whether the State authority must assist in taking possession and provide police protection.
Applicability of the precedent set in Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra.

Legislation cited

Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 — s. 14

Subjects

SARFAESI Act
secured assets
repossession
illegal trespass
bank
writ petition
police protection
Court Commissioner

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:43882-DB
                                                    1                        25.doc



                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD
                         25 WRIT PETITION NO. 12615 OF 2026

      JANA SMALL FINANCE BANK LTD THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER
              MOHAMMED ABDUL KHALID MOHD. ABDUL RAHIM
                                VERSUS
                 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                             ...


                  Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Choure Balsaheb S.
                    AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. M.K. Goyanka
                                           …
                                           CORAM        : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
                                                          ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
                                             DATE       : 21.09.2026

             PER COURT :
             .        Heard learned advocate for the petitioner and learned AGP for
             State.

             2.       Petitioner is a financial institution, seeking re-possession of the
             secured assets in view of the order dated 28.03.2025 passed by the
             learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Osmanabad under Section 14 of the
             Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement
             of Security Interest Act, 2002, which the borrowers namely Atul Mulik
             and Shital Atul Mulilk have illegally trespassed. The petitioner received
             physical possession of the secured assets on 09.06.2025 by putting lock
             and seal thereon. It is alleged that the borrowers have broken the lock
             of the secured assets and taken forcible illegal possession and
             trespassed the property. Hence, the direction is sought to the
             respondent/authority to hand over the possession of the secured assets
                                     2                         25.doc



back to the petitioner.

3.      In view of the decision rendered by this Court at Principal Seat in
Writ Petition No.6805/2023 [Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. and Another
Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others) on 30/06/2023, the petition will
have to be allowed.

4.      Respondent No.3/Court Commissioner is directed to take
possession of the secured assets within a period of eight weeks from
today and hand over the same to the petitioner. Petitioner is willing to
pay the necessary charges for police protection. The in-charge of the
concerned police station to ensure that adequate police protection is
provided to take back the possession of the secured assets and to hand
it over to the petitioner.

5.      The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.

6.      List the matter on 07.12.2026, for compliance.




( ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J. )                ( NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J. )



vsj..

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…