Back
Manoj George, S/O. Late K. G. George – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala Represented By Public Prosecutor – Respondent
ORDER :
A. Badharudeen, J.
Accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.3099/2017 of Aluva East Police Station, which is now pending as C.C.No.1797/2017 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Aluva, seek quashment of the above proceedings on the ground that they are absolutely innocent of the allegations.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor, in detail. Though notice served to the 2nd respondent, no appearance.
3. In a nutshell, the allegation of the prosecution is that the accused herein committed offences punishable under Sections 447 and 506(i) r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'the IPC' hereinafter) as well as under Sections 17 and 18 of the Kerala Money-Lenders Act, 1958 (for short, ‘the Act, 1958’ hereinafter) and Section 3 of the Kerala Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2012 (for short, ‘the Act, 2012). The sum and substance of the allegation is that, the 1st accused, who did not have any licence under the Act, 1958, gave Rs.6 Lakh to the de facto complainant and her husband on undertaking to pay Rs.36,000/- towards interest for the said sum after obtaining blank cheque leaves of the de
The prosecution must provide substantial evidence to establish that an individual is engaged in money lending as a business to sustain charges under the Money-Lenders Act.
The necessity of proving that a person is engaged in money lending as a business and that the interest charged exceeds legal limits to sustain charges under the Kerala Money Lenders Act and the Keral....
The court affirmed the threshold for quashing proceedings under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., emphasizing that mere allegations must be substantiated by evidence to warrant dismissal.
To constitute an offence under the Money Lenders Act, there must be a demonstration of continuous business activity, not merely a single instance of money lending.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the transactions between the parties were purely commercial and not covered under the Money Lenders Act, leading to the quashing of the procee....
Money-lender means a person whose main or subsidiary occupation is business of advancing and realising loans or acceptance of deposits in course of such business.
Illegality of money lending must be substantiated by evidence of business, not just possession of documents.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
