1. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:-

                   "It is, therefore, most respectfully and humble prayed that by an appropriate writ, order or direction:

                   I. The present writ petition may kindly be allowed.

                   II. The possession of the secured/mortgaged, property, be restored back to the petitioner-Bank; an

                   III. The respondent Nos.2 to 3 may be directed to take the possession from the respondent No.1 and restore back the possession to the petitioner- Bank. That respondent Nos.2 & 3 be further directed to take up strict and stringent criminal case/proceedings including the initiation of appropriate proceedings under the Preventive Dentition Provisions contained in Article 22 of the constitution of India and other relevant statues against the respondent No.1 and every member of unlawful assembly responsible the crime. in the given facts and circumstances of the case and especially in response to the Complaint filed by the petitioner- Bank i.e. Annexure 6.

                   IV. Heavy cost may be ordered against the respondent No.1 including every member of unlawful assemble responsible for violating the orders of this hon'ble court and further assaulting the rule of law in the facts and circumstances of the case.

                   V. Appropriate proceedings and action under the Preventive Detention law and other appropriate statutes and law be invoked against respondent no 1 and every member of unlawful assembly responsible for committing the crime against this hon'ble court as well as the rule of law.

                   VI. Appropriate compensation with regard to the forcible possession taken by the respondent No.1 may also be awarded in favour of the petitioner- Bank. VII. Any other order of direction, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case may kindly be passed in favour of the humble petitioner.

                   VIII. That Appropriate Directions to secure the ends of justice and ensure the supremacy of the Rule of Law be passed to the State as Well as District Authorities Including Respondent No 4."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a Bank and it had granted loan to the respondent No.1. Since the loan amount was not repaid by the respondent No.1, therefore, he was declared as NPA and the proceedings under Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short 'the Act of 2002') were initiated by the petitioner- Bank under the Act of 2002, possession of the mortgaged property was taken over by the petitioner- Bank with the aid of police on 21.01.2025.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent No.1 after the possession of the mortgaged property being taken over by the petitioner- Bank, forcibly entered the mortgaged property by breaking in. It was submitted that act and inaction of the respondent No.1 is nothing but tantamount to be an assault on the rule of law. He submits that in the circumstances, the petitioner- Bank approached the Superintendent of Police, Hanumangarh and SHO, Pilibanga for restoring the possession of the mortgaged property but till date, no action has been taken by them.

4. Learned counsel further submitted that it is a sorry state of affairs that despite repeated requests by the petitioner- Bank to take action in the matter, the police authorities are rather silent in the matter by not taking any action pursuant to the complaint registered by the petitioner - Bank. Learned counsel thus prayed that the District Superintendent of Police, Hanumangarh and SHO, Pilibanga may be directed to act upon the applications/ representations filed by the petitioner for securing the possession of the property mortgaged by it particularly keeping in view the fact that the property in dispute already was taken over by the petitioner - Bank with police aid on 21.01.2025.

5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused the material available on record.

6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it just and appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to the Superintendent of Police, Hanumangarh and SHO, Pilibanga to act immediately take appropriate action for restoring the possession of the mortgaged property to the bank, in accordance with law. This Court is compelled to observe that if the petitioner is not allowed to take possession of the said property, it will amount to clear case of defiance of law and, therefore, the Superintendent of Police, Hanumangarh and SHO, Pilibanga are under an obligation to act in consonance with the provisions of law for restoring the possession of the petitioner in the circumstance since the petitioner has already approached them.

7. It is expected from the Superintendent of Police, Hanumangarh and SHO, Pilibanga that appropriate action for restoring the possession of the mortgaged property in favour of the petitioner- Bank shall be taken by them within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

8. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition as well as stay application stand disposed of.