LAXMI VIJAY SINGHversusBANK OF MAHARASHTRA

                                                                    903 WP 4637-24-OS.DOC




                                                                               Priya Soparkar

                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION


                                     WRIT PETITION NO. 4637 OF 2024
                      Laxmi Vijay Singh                                     …Petitioner
                           Versus
                      Bank of Maharashtra and ors.                       …Respondents


                      Mr. Rashid Khan with Mr. Aarif Dhariwala i/by Mr. Rakesh Kumar
                            Singh, for the Petitioner.
                      Ms. Ruchi P. Bagwe i/by Chittranjan, Sha, Kay Legal & Associates
                            LLP, for the Respondent No.1.
                      Mr. Oduvil Mohandas with Mr. Ashwin Nair and Mr. J. P. Kapadia
                            i/by Little & Co., for the Respondent No.3(RBI).


                                          CORAM: SUMAN SHYAM &
                                                 ADVAIT M. SETHNA, JJ.
                                          DATED:      6th AUGUST 2026.
                      PC:-

                      1.     Heard Mr. Rashid Khan, learned counsel appearing for the

                      Petitioner. We have also heard Ms. Ruchi P. Bagwe, learned counsel

                      appearing for the Respondent No.1-Bank and Mr. Oduvil

                      Mohandas, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.3-

PRIYA
                      RBI. None has appeared for the Respondent No.2.
RAJESH
SOPARKAR
Digitally signed by
PRIYA RAJESH
SOPARKAR
Date: 2026.08.06
16:50:53 +0530


                      2.     The Writ Petitioner is the widow of Late Vijay Anangpal

                      Singh who died in a tragic accident on 9th February, 2023. Late




                                                   Page 1 of 5
                                                 903 WP 4637-24-OS.DOC




Vijay Anangpal Singh, during his lifetime, had availed a loan from

the Respondent No.1-Bank. After his demise, the Petitioner being

his widow, had approached the bank on 2 nd August, 2023,

producing the death certificate of her husband. The allegation of

the Petitioner is that the bank official(s) had not only compelled

her to sign certain documents in a manner which was prejudicial to

her interest, but had also wrongfully restrained the Petitioner from

leaving the bank premises for about three hours, unless she

complied with demand of the Bank Manager. Aggrieved thereby,

the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the instant Writ

Petition, making the following prayers :-


      “A. That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of
      Mandamus or the nature of Mandamus or any other Writ,
      Order or Direction, ordering and directing the Respondent
      No.1 to return to the Petitioner the documents executed by
      her on 2nd August, 2023;
      B. That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of
      Mandamus or the nature of Mandamus or any other Writ,
      Order or Direction, ordering and directing the Respondent
      No.1 to produce before this Hon'ble Court CCTV Footage of
      2nd August 2023 from 12 Noon till 3.30 p.m.
      C. That after going through the documents produced by the
      Respondent No.1 which was illegally obtained from the
      petitioner, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of
      certiorari or any other writ in the nature of certiorari, and/or
      direction under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India and
      be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned documents.




                              Page 2 of 5
                                                  903 WP 4637-24-OS.DOC




      D. That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue writ of
      certiorari or any other writ in the nature of certiorari and
      thereby set aside the letter dated 30 th March 2024 of
      Respondent No.3 and further direct the said Respondent to
      consider the complaint lodged by the Petitioner against
      Respondent No.1 on merits. Exhibit -"O".


      E. That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to writ of mandamus
      or any other writ in the nature of mandamus and direct the
      Respondent No. 3 to take appropriate action against the
      Respondents Nos.1 and 2 for illegal activities carried on 2 nd
      August 2023.

      F. Pending the hearing and final disposal of the present
      Petition, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass an order
      restraining the Respondents Nos.1 and 2 on acting the
      documents illegally obtained from the Petitioner.

      G. That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant ad
      interim reliefs in terms of prayer clause (a to f) above;

      H. For such further and other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court
      may deem fit and proper;

      I. Cost of the petition be provided for.”



3.    In support of the prayers made in the Writ Petition, Mr.

Rashid Khan, learned counsel has argued that the Petitioner is

demanding copy of the CCTV footages in order to establish her

claim that the Bank Manager had compelled the Petitioner to

execute documents although there was no requirement on her part

to do so under the law.




                              Page 3 of 5
                                                    903 WP 4637-24-OS.DOC




4.    Mr. Khan has further submitted that his client has lodged a

complaint before the Ombudsman. Therefore, the relief prayed for

be granted.


5.    The Petitioner’s case has been contested by the learned

counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1 who has submitted that

the learned Ombudsman has closed the complaint of the Petitioner

as the same was found to be devoid of any merit.


6.    Be that as it may, after hearing the submission of Mr. Khan, it

appears that the Petitioner is primarily seeking production of CCTV

footages to establish her claim that the wrongful treatment was

meeted out to her by the Bank Manager. However, the fact remains

that even if the allegation of the Petitioner turns out to be correct,

even then, it would be necessary for her to lodge a complaint of

wrongful      restraint   and   wrongful      confinement,   which   are

punishable offence as per Sections 126 and 127 of the Bharatiya

Nyay Sanhita, 2023. The Petitioner has not made any such

complaint. In the absence of any complaint to that effect, we fail to

understand as to what purpose will be served by calling the CCTV

footages.




                                Page 4 of 5
                                               903 WP 4637-24-OS.DOC




7.    In so far as the complaint before the Banking Ombudsman is

concerned, the same has admittedly being closed. Therefore, it

cannot be said that as on date any complaint pertaining to the

alleged conduct of the bank official is pending before any

Competent Forum.


8.    Situated thus, we close the Writ Petition, by granting liberty

to the Petitioner to avail appropriate legal remedy, as may be

permissible under the law.



(ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.)                        (SUMAN SHYAM, J.)
                                                                   {




                             Page 5 of 5