Muthoot Finance Ltd vs State By The Sho on 14 July, 2010

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Muthoot Finance Ltd vs State By The Sho on 14 July, 2010

Bench: Subhash B.Adi

1.

my

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THES THE 14"! DAY OF JULY, 2010

BEFO RE

"rm: HONBLEE MR.JUS'I'lCE SUBI-[ASH  }a»I;'.i:   ' A'

 

CRIMINAL PETITION N0}  

 i

Muthoot Finance Ltd
Muthoot Chambers.» _
Banexji Road V 
Ernakulam
Ker;-ala -- 682 O} 8
Rep. by  , :  _ _ _ 
Ma11aging;'D1f';3Ct01-  2:   A ' 
George/%vl€9ga:é§§ie'.1' .i\'[4l.;;i'1'l:'C)§)t   V

S/0 Late. £\«'-iIGe0'1*ge EV/'ITL.1f_h'un_t_V~

Age:__A§4 y<.j2i'1'S 1_;._   " .

O."I'.M3.thuni1yT '  " 
S/o'Q.P.';'hec.1;u--.,"-- 
Age 61 years ' _ "
,.--::.gi0r1a1'V P.%Eanage1' V
.» 'E1/1ut}100t Fiziange L?_d..
":} 11",/.2, Canibfidge Road

' * .. _VUlsQ0r.--.B&n_ga10re -- 560 008.

"7"._;aaj:a§haj<1i;u9 .A

'  S/0 M.'A~;fmaia1'1

 1 ' y'ea:'s
B1"':{:r1i<::h Man agttr

V' 'A .«__1\/Iuihooi Finance Ltd..

VV  Ulsoor, }3a.ngaE0r<=:- 560 008.

11/2, Cambridge Road
....PETITIONERS

(By Sri.M.B.Na1-gL111d 8: Smt. Sena Vakkund, Advs.)



1.

State by The SHO Ulsoor Poiice Station Bangalore.

2. Byanna BM S/o Not Known Age: Not Known No.18. Byrasandra C.V.RamanNaga.I' = Bangalore.

(By Sri_ B.Baiak1'iShha, -- '-

THIS CRIMINAL PE'I'I'1'EON IS "FILED i;N'oI~:R S"I1?C'.Fi'ON 482' CR.P.C PRAYING 'I'HA'I"1"HES IIoN'BI;r;_coUR4r MIAYBI5 PLEASED TO QUASH THE F'iR REGD. BY '1'IIEe..iiveSiPoNnENT'I\Io.I,*AS CRIME N037/2010 PENDENG ON 'rH~:+_: 91:12: or-:2; Ac:MM.. BANGALORE. THIS PETITION COMING» C)i'~:I"vF'C)R At§iIv:iSSIQN THIS DAY. THE comm' MADE TI-IE r.o1.I.o:wI:xIe;;'w W "

D E R Petitioner LTD.) has called in question' the hI*o.e_eeoings in Crirne No.37/2010 registered by atjieovor Bangntore City. on 2.2.20}O for the offence AI:)",t1'£i$hQbié'~«t?tvI'lV{ii£IT~:'S€CtiOi'lS 3 <3: 4 of the KEl1'1'1Ett£{kf:1 Prohibition of Cha1;'gi.11g_'v'l:?.xtii"bitiaI1t. Interest Act, 2004 and Section 39 r/w ' VSeAet4io1i.t3._of the Karma-taka Money Lend__e1*s Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner Submits that, the eornplaiiit. is against one '£\/iUTHOO'1' FENCORP FINANCE " V PRIVATE L'1'D., and not against the petitioner No.1 'MUTHOOT FINANCE', LTD'. He Submitted that, this petitioner Company is -3- got-'e1"r1ed' by the R.B.l. Regulations and it has liberty to charge the imerest. as per the petitioners companies regu1at1'<)r1.

3. In this regard. this Court had directed the G.Jve'1=r1lmvent Pleader to verify from the lm-'estig21tiI1g Officer discrepancy in the name of the _a.£:(:_used--.'H'On-L'_*vei"ifi'e.atimi.". Government, Pleader has fL:r11is'.1f1ed_f..::t 'r_ep0li't. '*»::t11e Supe.r1'nt,endent': lnspectter of UEs(')*o}" Police' Stat1'Ql1l"i.A{ w_t1e1'e3in t,l?.e* said police 0l'f'icer has stated l.l1al".:vii-C):If1ft}Sl()Il'tJ{ietl1'1'€3tl regard to 'MUTl-IOOT FINANCE FINCORP' and the complaint. is againstLl':-e._':l\/£U7flvl,O(5T and he will correct the 1*ec7,.{33TCE. _. , lr1llviewl'0§jtl}e 3;%f:t3l01ft;~.l':'i'lnd the proceedings insofar as the pet1'ticner.is c--r)_x1"t>.r':_t':~'1._1le'ai_,_they do not survive. I--"'_et'.it.i01'i" ~disp0_sed A '01'. ' ' "

'-l.,_'l:"lC}._'»V.C\/'81', libei't;y~----is reserved to the. Investtigatirtg Officer to "'--..pr-;§:~'eeg; 'wlt1i_'i:t1:e rMUT1~1ooT FINCORPZ Sd/3 IUDGE '' *AI3'/~

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court