HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P. G. Ajithkumar, J
RAJU.V.J – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Crl.MC 5586/2019
Quash - Criminal Proceedings - Kerala Money Lenders Act, Kerala Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act - Dismissal of proceedings upheld due to lack of prosecutable evidence.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner faced charges under the Kerala Money Lenders Act and the Kerala Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, relating to a loan obtained and repayment issues. Complaints were filed alleging threats and intimidation by the petitioner.
Issues: Whether the proceedings against the petitioner under the Kerala Money Lenders Act and the Kerala Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act were maintainable given the evidence presented.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that a solitary instance of lending does not constitute the offense outlined under the Money Lenders Act, and the prosecution failed to establish any violation of the Prohibition against charging exorbitant interest.
Final Decision: All further proceedings in CC No.906/2016 are quashed.
This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed to quash all further proceedings in C.C.No.906/2016 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Ottapalam. The above case is charge sheeted against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Sections 17 r/w 3 of the Kerala Money Lenders Act and under Sections 3 , 9(a) of the Kerala Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act , 2012. Annexure A1 is the FIR and Annexure A1(a) is the transfer FIR in the above case.
2.The prosecution case is that an amount of Rs.10,000 was borrowed by the complainant from the accused on 19.08.2005 and as security, collected cheque belonging to the complainant and his friend Jyothish and blank stamp papers. He alleges that the said amount was paid in 46 installments. He further alleges that during the month of January 2010 an amount of Rs.10,000 were given to the accused. The accused demanded an amount of Rs.8,000 more and refused to return the document collected is the submission. It is further alleges that the complainant and his friend attacked by Goons of the accused. It is stated that a complaint with respect to the said incident was lodged with Mankara police station. Thereafter the accused allegedly used the cheque and filed a complaint alleging offences punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the complainant and one such complaint was lodged at Adoor Magistrate Court for an amount of Rs.2.5 lakhs. It is also alleged that the accused used to threaten and intimidate the complainant over phone. The complaint containing the allegation above was filed before the District Police Chief and the same was forwarded to the Mankara Police Station and the instant crime case was registered on the basis of the same.
Subsequently the case was transferred and the investigating officer filed Annexure A2 final report. Aggrieved by the same, this Criminal Miscellaneous case is filed.
3.Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor and also counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent.
4.It is submitted that Annexure A1 FIR has been lodged by the accused after receipt of summons in CC No.119 of 2015 pending before Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Adoor, which was taken on file on the basis of a private complaint filed during the year 2010 by the petitioner herein alleging offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act against the defacto complainant in Annexure A2 Final Report. Annexure A3 is the complaint. It is submitted that the complaint initially filed was returned for presentation before Jurisdictional Court. Thereafter the complaint was submitted before Jurisdiction Court, Palakkad and later the said complaint was returned from that court also for the production of the complaint before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Adoor.
Accordingly the complaint was sent back from Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Palakkad to Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Adoor, and cognizance was taken on the complaint and the case was registered as CC No.119 of 2015. It is submitted that Annexure A1 FIR was registered on the basis of a false complaint and Annexure A2 Final Report has been made without conducting proper investigation.
5.It is also submitted that Final Report is filed after the period of limitation mentioned in Section 468 CrPC and therefore taking cognizance based on Annexure A2 FIR is unsustainable. In addition to that the counsel for the petitioner also submitted that even if the entire allegations are accepted there is only a solitary instance of lending money for interest and that will not attract the offences under the Kerala Protection of Charging Exhorbitant Interest Act. The Public Prosecutor and the counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submitted that the offence is made out and this court may not interefere with the final report under Section 482 CrPC.
6.This court considered the contention of the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. admittedly the FI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.