Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/28305/2026 of Gadde Jhansi Rani Vs Reserve Bank of India on 12 October 2026
of 2026 1 APHC010521322026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] TUESDAY, THE 13th DAY OF OCTOBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 28305/2026 Between: 1. GADDE JHANSI RANI, C/O DAMARLA
RC,J
APHC010521322026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE 13th DAY OF OCTOBER 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO: 28305/2026
Between:
1. GADDE JHANSI RANI, C/O DAMARLA VEERANJANEYULU, AGED
ABOUT
YEARS,
RIO.
FLAT
NO.404,
NSR
PLAZA,
MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, MAIN BUILDING, P.O.BOX 901, SHAHID
BHAGAT SINGH ROAD, MUMBAI 400 001, REP. BY ITS CHIEF
GENERAL MANAGER
2. LIC HOUSING FINANCRE LTD, II-G, 1ST FLOOR, ANAND HEIGHTS, D.NO. 20-4-15, OK REDDY ROAD, KEDARESWARA PETA, VIJAYAWAD - 520003
3. LIC HOUSING FINANCRE LTD, 131, MAKER TOWER, F
PREMISES, 13TH FLOOR, CUFFE PARADE, MUMBAI 400005
4. LIC HOUSING FINANCRE LTD, BOMBAY LIFE BUILDING, 2 '
FLOOR, 45/47, VEER NARIMAN ROAD, MUMBAI - 400001
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 4 and their agents in resorting to intimidation and harassment by verbal, adoption of abusive practices against the petitioner in the process of debt collection without RC,J
following the guidelines of 1st respondent prescribed in Circular RBI/2008
09/39DBOD.FSD.BC.6/24.01.0111/2008-09,
dt.01.07.2008
and
Master
Circular
RBI/2014-15DBOD
No.Dir.BC.16/13.03.00/2014-15,
dt.01.07.2014 as illegal, arbitration and violation of Article 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 1st respondent to ensure that respondents 2 to 4 and their agents engaged for recovery of the dues should strictly adhere to the guidelines issued by the 1st respondent and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to restrain the respondents in resorting to intimidation and harassment by verbal, adoption of abusive practices against the petitioner in the process of debt collection during pendency of the Writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. C SUBODH
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of the respondent nos.2 to 4/banks in harassing the petitioner and his family members by sending loan recovery agents to the house of the petitioner, by making continuous phone calls and humiliating him in front of neighbours without following the guidelines issued by Reserve Bank of India vide Memo No.RBI/2022-23/108, dated 12.08.2022.
2. Heard Sri C.Subodh, learned counsel for petitioner.
3. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
RC,J
4. The Hon’ble Apex Court in ICICI Bank Ltd. V. Prakash Kaur and others1 has categorically held that the practice of hiring recovery agents, who are musclemen, is deprecated and needs to be discouraged. The Bank should resort to procedure recognized by law if the borrower have committed default in payment of the installments instead of taking resort to strong arm tactics. However, as the respondents contend that they never sent agents and they have an intention to follow law for recovery, there is no purpose in keeping the writ petition pending, as such, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition.
5. In view of the above, respondent nos.2 to 4 should resort to procedure recognized by law if the borrower have committed default in payment of the installments instead of taking resort to strong arm tactics.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. However, the respondent nos. 2 to 4 are not precluded to take steps in accordance with law for recovery of money, if any, payable by the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 13th October, 2026
RR
1 (2007) 2 SCC 711 n