SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 11558

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 17.08.2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA Crl.R.C.No. 899 of 2023 &

Crl.M.P. Nos. 7313 & 11521 of 2023

1. Damodar Hariram

2. Amit Damodar

3. Vinay R. Asrani

4. Ramesh L Asrani ...Petitioners Vs.

1. The State Represented by The Inspector of Police CCB-I, Chennai.

2. Arumugam ...Respondents Prayer : Criminal Revision filed under Section 397 Cr.P.C. against the order dated 20.04.2023 passed in Crl.M.P. No.3557/2023 on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate, for Exclusive Trial of CCB cases (relating to Cheating Cases in Chennai) and CBCID Metro Cases, Egmore, Chennai 600 008.

For Petitioners : Mr.P.V.Balasubramanian, Senior Counsel Assisted by M/s. S. Ganesh & Ganesh, Mr. K. Jayaraman For R1 : Mr.R. Vinothraja Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

For R2 : Mr. R. Vivekananthan

ORDER

The revision petitioners are the accused 1 to 4 in CCB Crime No.258/2022 of Central Crime Branch, Chit & Kanthuvatti Wing, Team VII, Egmore, Chennai.

2. Arumugam, the 2nd respondent (defacto complainant)

lodged a complaint with the Inspector of Police Central Crime Branch, Chit & Kanthuvatti Wing, Team VII, Egmore, Chennai stating that the present petitioners are charging exorbitant rate of interest for the loan of Rs.1,70,00,000/- borrowed by him.

3. The case of the defacto complainant in nutshell is as follows:

(1)The defacto complainant is running a construction business in the name and style of M/s. Rajkham Housing and M/s.Rajkham Builders Private Limited and he is the Managing Director of the both the companies.

(2)Since the defacto complainant was in need of money, he borrowed a sum of Rs.1,70,00,000/- from the revision petitioners and also created a simple mortgage by deposit of title deed dated 20.01.2022 and the same was registered as document No.230/2022 dated 21.01.2022 on the file of the Sub Registrar Office, Kodambakkam.

(3)When the defacto complainant approached the revision petitioners/accused to redeem the mortgaged properties, they demanded a sum of Rs.40 lakhs towards interest and thus charged an exorbitant rate of interest.

(4)Based on these allegations, an FIR in Crime No.258/2022 was registered by the 1st respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Exorbitant Interest Act, 2003 and 406 and 420 IPC against the present revision petitioners and the following documents were seized from them.

S. No. Doc. No. Date of Document Nature of the document Executed by In favour of
1. 5788/1981 30.09.1981 Simple Mortgage deed Noorjahan Bibi & another The Nungambakkam Saswatha Dhana Rakshaka Nidhi Ltd.
2. 2035/1983 25.07.1983 Simple Mortgage deed Noorjahan Bibi & another The Nungambakkam Saswatha Dhana Rakshaka Nidhi Ltd.
3. 2728/1985 30.08.1985 First Simple Mortgage deed Noorjahan Bibi & another Parvathiraman
4. 243/1989 26.04.1989 Power of Attorney Mrs. M.Noorjahan Bibi Mr. Haja Mohideen
5. 2465/1995 04.05.1995 Receipt Parvathiraman M.Noorjahan Bibi
6. 2536/1995 08.05.1995 Simple Mortgage deed Noorjahan Bibi & another Ineian Members Benefit Fund Ltd.
7. 1493/2002 19.04.2002 Receipt Ineian Members Benefit Fund Ltd. Noorjahan Bibi & another
8. 1733/2002 09.05.2002 Sale deed Noorjahan Bibi & another Mrs. Nirubarani
9. 1734/2002 09.05.2002 Sale deed Noorjahan Bibi & another Mr.T.Muthu Vijayan
10. CA No.1084 / 80-81 06.07.1981 Extract from permanent Land Register Tahsildar Egmore- - Nungambakkam Taluk Noorjahan
11. CA No. 242/02-03 20.02.2023 Extract from Town survey Land Register Tahsildar Egmore- - Nungambakkam Taluk Nirubarani & T.Muthu Vijayan
12. 230/2022 21.01.2022 Agreement relating to deposit of title deeds. Muthu Vijayan & Niruba Rani Vinay Asrani
The above documents were filed before the Metropolitan Magistrate, For Exclusive Trial of CCB cases (relating to Cheating Cases in Chennai) and CBCID Metro Cases, Egmore, Chennai-8 under form 95.

(5)Thereafter the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant filed a petition under Section 451 r/w 457 Cr.P.C in Crl.M.P. No.3557/2023 before the trial court seeking return of documents seized from the revision petitioners/accused by the police. The said petition was partly allowed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Exclusive Trial of CCB cases (relating to Cheating Cases in Chennai) and CBCID Metro Cases, Egmore, Chennai 600 008, vide her orders dated 20.04.2023, by returning the documents 1 to11 on the following conditions:

"(1) The petitioner is hereby directed to the produce the certified copy of the said documents before this court.

(2) The petitioners shall produce the said documents before this Court as and when required."

As far as document No.12 is concerned, it was dismissed by the trial court on the ground that it is only a photostat copy .

4. Aggrie

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top