Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1290 (KAR)

K. v. Madhusudan Yadav VS State of Karnataka

2022-09-27

KRISHNA S.DIXIT

body2022
JUDGMENT Krishna S. Dixit, J. - The subject matter of this writ petition is substantially similar to the one in W.P.No.18147/2022 (GM-RES) between M/S. Sampi Exports Pvt. Ltd.,Vs. The State Of Karnataka & Another, disposed off by this Court on 14.09.2022. The operative portion of the said order reads as under: 'Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, this Court is of a considered opinion that should the respondent-Investigating Officer, accept the proposal of the petitioner and the bank guarantee accordingly is furnished with a renewal clause, the purpose of seizing the account would be more than served and thus, the requirement of such a seizure would cease. The other contentions may not merit consideration in view of the fair stand taken by the petitioner before the Court. With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed off making it clear that petitioner shall not plead equity on the basis of the relief now granted to him. It hardly needs to be stated that the bank guarantee should be renewed from time to time, failing which, the Police may once again seize the account or any property worth of bank guarantee.' 2. The Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.932-933/1974 between A.V. Vinoda & Another Vs. State of Karnataka by ITS Commissioner & Secretary disposed off on 11.12.1974, has held that the Court should treat the like-cases alike and if relief is granted to a litigant it has to be extended to a similarly circumstanced litigant as well, there being no derogatory circumstances. 3. In view of the above, the relief granted to the litigant in the cognate writ petition is extended to the petitioner herein mutantis mutandis.