CWP No.20965 of 2010.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.20965 of 2010 Date of Decision: 25.11.2010 **** M/s. S&D Fabrics & Anr. . . . . Petitioners VS. State Bank of India and others . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Ms. Sangita Dhanda, Advocate for the petitioners ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The possession of the factory premises/industrial unit of the petitioners was taken over by the respondent- Bank in purported exercise of its powers under Section 13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. (2). The petitioners’ grievance appears to be that some of the machinery has been allegedly removed from the factory premises by respondents No.2&4 and/or with their connivance, thereby committing the offence of ‘theft’. CWP No.20965 of 2010.doc - 2 – (3). It is alleged that though the petitioners have made a complaint dated 19.05.2010 (Annexure P9) but no action has been taken by the police authorities so far. (4). Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners, I am of the considered view that no case to interfere with by this Court at this stage is made out. Suffice it to say that if the police authorities are not taking any action on the complaint dated 19.05.2010 moved by the petitioners, they can have recourse to the alternative remedy available under the Code of Criminal Procedure. (5). With this liberty and observations, the writ petition stands dismissed. (6). Dasti . 25.11.2010 vishal shonkar (SURYA KANT) JUDGE