Rajasthan HC Directs Bhilwara Police to Restore SARFAESI Possession Within 15 Days After Borrowers Forcibly Re-entered Mortgaged Property
The Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur ordered the Superintendent of Police and SHO, Kotdi to act within 15 days to restore possession of a mortgaged property to Roha Housing Finance after borrowers broke back in.
Justice Sanjeet Purohit, sitting as Vacation Judge at the Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur, disposed of a writ petition filed by Roha Housing Finance Pvt. Ltd. on 3 June 2026, directing the Superintendent of Police, Bhilwara and the Station House Officer, PS Kotdi, District Bhilwara to immediately take appropriate action to restore possession of a mortgaged property to the petitioner bank. The court gave the two police officers fifteen days from receipt of the certified copy of the order to comply. The petition arose after the bank's borrowers — declared non-performing assets — forcibly re-entered the property after it had already been seized under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, and the local police had done nothing despite repeated complaints.
How the Dispute Reached the High Court
Roha Housing Finance Pvt. Ltd., a housing finance company with a branch office at Bhilwara, Rajasthan, had extended a loan to respondents Mukesh Kumar Soni and Santosh Devi, residents of Village Mali Kheda, District Bhilwara. When the loan was not repaid, the account was classified as an NPA and the bank initiated proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, 2002. On 28 January 2026, the bank took physical possession of the mortgaged property — Patta No. 64, Araji No. 1119/1, Village Mali Kheda, Patwar Halka Mali Kheda, District Bhilwara — with police assistance.
After possession was taken, respondents Nos. 4 and 5 forcibly broke into the property and re-occupied it. The bank approached the SHO, Kotdi, District Bhilwara, seeking restoration of possession. According to the petitioner's counsel, Mr. Tarun Dudia, the police maintained what he described as a “studied silence” and took no action despite repeated applications and representations.
The bank then filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12364/2026 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Rajasthan High Court. The petitioner's counsel pointed out that a Co-ordinate Bench of the same court had already passed an interim order dated 4 May 2026 in a similar matter — S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9512/2026, also titled Roha Housing Finance Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan — involving a comparable controversy.
The Legal Issue: Police Inaction After a Lawful SARFAESI Seizure
The SARFAESI Act, 2002 permits secured creditors to take possession of mortgaged assets without court intervention when a borrower defaults. Once possession is taken under the Act, any forcible re-entry by the borrower is an interference with a lawful process. The question before the court was whether the police authorities were obliged to act on the bank's complaint and restore possession, given that the original seizure had itself been carried out with police aid.
The petitioner's prayers were specific: direct respondents Nos. 2 and 3 — the Superintendent of Police, Bhilwara and the SHO, Kotdi — to remove the trespassers from the property and hand over vacant physical possession to the bank's authorised officer in a time-bound manner, without levy of any charges, as directed in an earlier order dated 29 November 2025.
The Court's Reasoning
Justice Purohit, after hearing counsel for the petitioner and perusing the record, found the facts sufficient to warrant immediate directions. The court observed that if the bank were not allowed to retain possession of the property, it would amount to a clear case of defiance of law. The Superintendent of Police and the SHO were described as being under an obligation to act in consonance with the provisions of law, given that the bank had already approached them and that possession had originally been taken with police assistance on 28 January 2026.
The court did not merely issue a notice or call for a response from the State. It disposed of the writ petition outright with binding directions, reflecting the view that the factual position — a lawful SARFAESI possession followed by a forcible re-entry and subsequent police inaction — left little room for further deliberation.
Outcome
The writ petition was disposed of on 3 June 2026. The Superintendent of Police, Bhilwara (respondent No. 2) and the SHO, Kotdi, District Bhilwara (respondent No. 3) were directed to act immediately and take appropriate action to restore possession of the mortgaged property to Roha Housing Finance Pvt. Ltd. in accordance with law. The court specified that this action must be completed within fifteen days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order.
The stay application and all other pending applications in the matter were also disposed of.