Case Note & Summary
The judgment arose from several writ petitions filed before the Rajasthan High Court by financial institutions, primarily Jana Small Finance Bank Limited and Motilal Oswal Home Finance Limited, against the State of Rajasthan, police authorities, and individual borrowers. The petitioners were secured creditors registered under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The borrowers had availed financial assistance by mortgaging secured assets but defaulted on repayment. The banks invoked Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act and, upon continued default, initiated proceedings under Section 13(4). The banks then applied under Section 14 of the Act before the concerned District Magistrate, who by order dated 16.09.2025 directed physical possession of the secured assets to be handed over to the banks with police assistance. Possession was taken accordingly. However, it was alleged that the borrowers subsequently re-entered the secured premises unauthorisedly and forcibly, thereby overreaching the process of law. The banks filed writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking directions to the Superintendent of Police and Station House Officer to restore possession and take necessary legal action. The respondent police authorities opposed the petitions, contending that an alternative efficacious remedy existed under the SARFAESI Act itself and that the banks should approach the concerned Magistrate who had passed the Section 14 order. The petitioners in rejoinder argued that the Magistrate's jurisdiction under Section 14 is administrative and not adjudicatory, and repeated orders under Section 14 are neither permissible nor desirable; the police authorities were duty bound to protect the possession already granted. The core legal issue before the court was whether a writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable in such circumstances or whether the alternative remedy under SARFAESI Act bars it. The court reproduced Section 14(1) and (2) of the SARFAESI Act, which outlines the procedure for the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate to assist secured creditors in taking possession. The available excerpt of the judgment ends before the final holding, so the ultimate decision and ratio are not included. The court recognised that the Magistrate's role under Section 14 is administrative and that police authorities have a legal obligation to protect the possession of the secured creditor after an order under Section 14. The judgment thus addresses the enforcement of security interests and the limits of judicial review in the context of SARFAESI Act proceedings.
Headnote
A) Banking and Finance - Enforcement of Security Interest - Sections 14(1) and (2), Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 - Maintainability of writ petition for restoration of possession after borrower's forcible re-entry - The petitioners, secured creditors, obtained an order under Section 14 from the District Magistrate for physical possession with police assistance, but borrowers re-entered; the question was whether a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable or if alternative remedy under SARFAESI Act exists; the court noted that Magistrate's jurisdiction under Section 14 is administrative and police authorities are duty bound to protect possession, but the final decision is not available in the provided excerpt (Paras 11-12).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable for restoration of possession when the borrower forcibly re-enters the secured asset after an order under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, or whether an alternative remedy exists under the SARFAESI Act.
Final Decision
Not mentioned (provided judgment text ends before final holding)
Law Points
- Section 13 of SARFAESI Act deals with enforcement of security interest
- Section 14 provides for Magistrate to assist secured creditor in taking possession
- Magistrate's jurisdiction under Section 14 is administrative and not adjudicatory
- police authorities are duty bound to protect possession after Section 14 order
- alternative remedy under SARFAESI Act may bar writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
Case Details
2026 LawText (RAJ) (06) 18
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10026/2026 (Connected with S.B. Civil Writ Petition Nos. 10027/2026, 10030/2026, 10355/2026, 10356/2026, 10357/2026, 10358/2026, 10368/2026, 10375/2026)
Akhilesh Pareek, Punit Mathur, Somitra Chaturvedi, Devakriti Vashistha, Sunita Meena, Bhuwnesh Sharma
Jana Small Finance Bank Limited; Motilal Oswal Home Finance Limited
State of Rajasthan, Superintendent of Police, Station Housing Officer, and private borrower respondents
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking police assistance to restore possession of secured assets after borrowers forcibly re-entered despite Section 14 orders under SARFAESI Act.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner financial institutions sought directions to the Superintendent of Police and Station House Officer to ensure restoration of possession of the secured assets and to take necessary action under law.
Filing Reason
Borrowers unauthorizedly and forcibly re-entered the secured premises after physical possession had been lawfully handed over to the secured creditors pursuant to District Magistrate orders under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.
Previous Decisions
District Magistrate, Deeg passed order dated 16.09.2025 under Section 14 of SARFAESI Act allowing the petitioner finance company to take physical possession of the secured asset with police assistance; possession was subsequently taken.
Issues
Whether a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable for restoration of possession when the borrower forcibly re-enters the secured asset after an order under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.
Whether an alternative remedy is available under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act that would bar the writ petition.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that jurisdiction of Magistrate under Section 14 is administrative in nature and not adjudicatory; repeated orders under Section 14 are neither permissible nor desirable; once an order under Section 14 is passed, the police authorities are duty bound to protect the possession of the petitioner over the secured asset.
Respondent police authorities argued that the petitioner has an alternative efficacious remedy under the SARFAESI Act itself; the writ petition is not maintainable; the petitioner can seek appropriate directions from the concerned Magistrate who passed the initial order under Section 14.
Ratio Decidendi
Not mentioned (final ratio not available; the court was examining maintainability and the scope of Section 14 of SARFAESI Act, noting that Magistrate's jurisdiction is administrative and police have a duty to protect possession after a Section 14 order)
Judgment Excerpts
Core questions involved in these matters is that once the District Magistrate/Chief Metropolitan Magistrate issues directions under Section 14 of the Act of 2002 directing for taking physical possession of the secured asset with the police assistance and pursuant thereto, possession is also handed over to the secured creditor, a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would be maintainable or not, in the event the borrower forcibly re-enters the secured asset in violation of such order, or whether an alternative remedy is available under the provisions of the Act of 2002.
14. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate to assist secured creditor in taking possession of secured asset.— (1) Where the possession of any secured assets is required to be taken by the secured creditor or if any of the secured assets is required to be sold or transferred by the secured creditor under the provisions of this Act, the secured creditor may, for the purpose of taking possession or control of any such secured assets, request, in writing, the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or the District Magistrate within whose jurisdiction any such secured asset
Procedural History
The petitioner financial institutions filed applications under Section 14 of SARFAESI Act before the concerned District Magistrates; orders dated 16.09.2025 allowed physical possession with police assistance; possession was taken and handed over to the petitioners; borrowers subsequently re-entered the secured assets; writ petitions were filed seeking directions for restoration of possession and police action; all connected writ petitions were heard together and decided by common order dated 30/06/2026.
Acts & Sections
- Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act): Section 13, Section 14
- Constitution of India: Article 226
