Skip to main content

Publishing photographs of defaulters in newspapers illegal: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held as arbitrary and illegal the decision of the State Bank of India to publish the photographs of loan defaulters in newspapers.

Allowing writ petitions filed by two defaulters against the SBI notice, the court on Tuesday observed that the threat held out by banks to publish the photographs of defaulters in newspapers lacked legislative sanction.

Justice V. Chitambaresh said: “The practice of exhibiting a photograph of a person and shamming him in public for the sin of being in an impecunious condition cannot be encouraged in civilised societies like ours.”

The judge further observed that there was nothing immoral in their failure to repay the loans owing to a floundering business or other unavoidable reasons.

The court added that some of the borrowers might even be driven to commit suicide fearing ignominy on account of their photographs being published in newspapers. “It will remain a permanent taboo for their family,” the court observed.

The move was clearly an “affront to the right to live with dignity and honour as well as the right to privacy of the loanees”.

Such publication of photographs therefore, violates the rights guaranteed to the loanees under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the court held.

SBI’S STAND

However, the SBI justified its stand saying the terms and conditions of the loan agreements allowed them to publish defaulters’ photographs in newspapers.

But the court pointed out that the clause in the agreement at best empowered the bank to reveal only the names of borrowers in the print media or to disclose the information and details relating to the credit facility.

Even if there was such a permissive clause, the loanees would “not (be) stopped” from challenging the action of a bank “on the ground of violation of fundamental rights of loanees”, the court said.

The court also pointed out that there was no provision in the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules (SARFAESI) that enables banks to threaten to publish photograph of defaulters.

Article referred: http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/industry-and-economy/banking/publishing-photographs-of-defaulters-in-newspapers-illegal-kerala-high-court/article5019565.ece

Comments

Most viewed this month

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.

No Rebate For Stamp Duty Paid In Another State - Bombay HC

A three judge bench of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (Bombay HC) in a recent judgment in the matter of Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Maharashtra State, Pune and Superintendent of Stamp (Headquarters), Mumbai v Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai and Reliance Petroleum Limited, Gujarat1 has held that orders in case of a scheme of arrangement under Section 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) involving different High Courts in multiple states, are separate instruments in themselves. Accordingly, stamp duty would be payable on all the orders (and consequently, all the states) without the benefit of remission, rebate or set-off.