Bangalore District Court
State By Central Crime Branch vs For Above Offences on 8 April, 2022
IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL.CMM: BENGALURU
Dated this the 8th day of April 2022
Present: Shri Anand T Chavan, B.Com., LL.B(Spl.).
I Addl. C.M.M BENGALURU.
JUDGMENT U/s. 355 Cr.P.C.,
Case No. : C.C.No.6680/2019
Date of Offence : 13-7-2018 to 10-10-2018
Name of complainant : State by Central Crime Branch
(F and M), N.T. Pet, Bengaluru.
(By Learned Sr. APP)
Name of accused : Smt.Krishnaveni @ Krishnamma,
W/o Balappa, R/o No.401,
1st main, Panchasheelanagar,
Moodalapalya, Bengaluru.
(By Sri. Adinarayanappa, Advocate)
Offences complained off: U/s.41, 38 Karnatak Money
Lenders Act, 1961 R/w IPC
& 3 and 4 of Karnataka
Prohibition of Charging
Exorbitant Interest Act.
Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
Final Order : Accused is acquitted
Date of Order : 8-4-2022
2 C.C.No.6680/2019
JUDGMENT
Police Inspector, CCB (F and M) Squad has filed this charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 41, 38 of IPC R/w Karnataka Money Lenders Act 1961 and 3 and 4 of Karnataka Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2004.
2. Brief facts of prosecution case are that :- On 10-10-2018 while C.W.1 was in his office, he received credible information that accused is indulged in illegal money lending business. Immediately he secured C.Ws.2 and 3 panchas and left to the spot of accused along with C.Ws.4 to 6 staff members. On raiding the house of accused, the accused was found in possession of blank cheques, promissory notes, documents of autorickshaw, E-stamp papers, RC books of autorickshaws, sale deeds for the sake of running illegal money lending business. Further it was 3 C.C.No.6680/2019 confirmed that accused was carrying out such money lending business without valid licence from concerned authority and she was charging exorbitant interest from 5% to 15% on such loans. It was further revealed that on failure to repay the loan amount by borrowers, the accused used to form an unlawful assembly of supporters, she used to make galata in front of such borrowers for recovery of aforesaid illegal loan amount. Hence P.W.1 himself lodged first information before Vjayanagar PS which was registered by them in their P.S. Cr.No.551/2018 and FIR is issued. After recording statements of materials witnesses, after collecting material documents and after completion of investigation, I.O. filed charge sheet against accused for above offences.
3. After filing this charge sheet, cognizance of above offences is taken, accused appeared before this Court in pursuant to summons and she is 4 C.C.No.6680/2019 enlarged on bail. Charge sheet copy is furnished to accused u/s 207 of Cr.P.C and charge is framed. Accused has not pleaded guilt of alleged offences and she has claimed to be tried.
4. In order to prove the guilt of the accused, prosecution has examined 12 witnesses as P.Ws.1 to 12 and got marked 27 documents as per Exs.P1 to P27. After completion of prosecution evidence, statement of the accused as required under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. has been recorded. The accused has denied the incriminating evidence against her and she has not led any defence evidence.
5. On the basis of charge sheet allegation, the following points arose for consideration:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused has indulged in illegal money lending business without obtaining valid licence and permission from concerned authority and thereby she has committed offences punishable 5 C.C.No.6680/2019 under section 41, 38 of Karnataka Money Lenders Act 1961 R/W IPC ?
2. Whether prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused has illegally charged exorbitant interest at 5% to 15% on loan lent by her to her borrowers and thereby she has committed offences punishable u/s 3 and 4 of Karnataka Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2004 ?
3. What order ?
6. Heard arguments of learned Sr.APP and learned counsel for accused. Perused oral and documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution. The following are findings to above points.
Point No.1 and 2 : In the Negative Point No.3 : As per final order, for the following:
REASONS
7. Point No.1 and 2 :- These points are taken together for consideration as findings on one point have bearing on other point.
6 C.C.No.6680/2019
8. P.W.1 Venkatachalaiah S/o Chikka Anjinappa the then ASI of CCB (F & M) and first informant of this case has testified in his evidence that on 10-10-2018 at 9.00 a.m. while he was SHO of CCB office, he received credible information that some people are indulged in illegal money lending business and immediately he rushed to spot along with his superior and C.W.4 to 6. He has further stated that accused was present at said place and cheques, promissory notes, documents of autorickshaw were seized from her under Ex.P1 mahazar. He has identified cheques as per Exs.P2 to P9, three E-stamps as per Exs.P10 to P12, four diaries as per Exs.P13 to P16, two RC books of autorickshaws as per Exs.P17 & P18, two sale deeds as per Ex.P19 and P20 and he has also identified first information lodged by him as per Ex.P21, his signature as per Ex.P21(a). In cross-examination entire evidence of this witness is denied by defence 7 C.C.No.6680/2019 side in toto and it is suggested to him that though he has not seized aforesaid documents, he has created aforesaid mahazar at police station itself. It is further suggested that there is no nexus between seized documents and accused.
9. P.W.2 Yogeshwar Rao S/o Venkoba Rao, the then HC of CCB (F & M) and one of raiding official has testified in his evidence that on 10-10-2018 they received information about illegal money lending business, he along with his superiors, P.W.1, C.Ws.5 to 7 rushed to said spot and recovered cheques, promissory notes, documents of authrickshaw under Ex.P1 mahazar. In cross-examination entire evidence of this witness is also denied by defence side and it is suggested to him that though there is no nexus between above documents and accused, he is deposing falsely as per instance of his superiors.
10. P.W.3 Suresh S/o Lingaiah the then HC of CB (F & M) has testified in his evidence that the I.O. of 8 C.C.No.6680/2019 this case has recovered some documents and books under Ex.P1 mahazar and he has identified his signature on it as per Ex.P1(b). In cross-examination it is suggested to P.W.3 that for the first time he is seeing accused in court and the above documents are not related to said accused.
11. P.W.4 Vidhyasree W/o Anand the then WPC of Vijayanagar PS has testified that I.O. has seized some documents and books under Ex.P1 mahazar and she has identified her signature on it as per Ex.P1(c). In cross-examination, entire evidence of this witness is also denied by defence side and it is suggested to her that she is deposing falsely as per instance of her superiors.
12. P.W.5 Devaraj S/o Sanna Thirumale Gowda and P.W.6 Umesh S/o Annaiah who are said to be independent witnesses and borrowers of accused have turned hostile by testifying that absolutely there was no money lending transaction between themselves and 9 C.C.No.6680/2019 accused, they have not borrowed any money from her, they have not issued any cheques or E-stamp papers and they have not given statements before police. Though P.Ws.5 and 6 are treated as hostile witnesses and cross-examined at length by learned Sr.APP., nothing worth while is elicited from their mouth to prove their alleged illegal loan transaction with accused. P.Ws.5 and 6 have denied to have given statement before I.O. as per Exs.P22 and P23.
13. P.W.7 Mallesh H. S/o K.Honnaiah, who is said to be another mahazar witness of Ex.P1 has turned hostile by testifying that on 10-10-2018 while he was in Banashankari bus stop, Vijayanagar police took him to their police station and obtained his signature on said mahazar as per Ex.P1(d). Though this witness is also treated as hostile witness and cross-examined at length by learned Sr.APP, nothing worth while is elicited form his mouth to prove seizure 10 C.C.No.6680/2019 of incriminating materials from accused as per Ex.P1 mahazar.
14. P.W.8 Mamatha W/o Ramachandra, who is said to be one of borrower of accused has testified and admitted that she had borrowed hand loan of Rs.30,000/- from accused for cloth business and she had issued a cheque in that regard. However, she has also turned hostile by stating that she has repaid Rs.27,000/- and accused will give her back the cheque on payment of remaining balance of Rs.3,000/-. Though P.W.8 is also treated as hostile and cross-examined by learned Sr.APP., she has denied that accused used to charge interest on above loan and she had given statement before I.O. as per Ex.P24.
15. P.W.9 Shankar S/o Shivanna who is said to be other of borrower of accused has also testified and admitted that he had borrowed hand loan of Rs.50,000/- from accused for sericulture business 11 C.C.No.6680/2019 and he had given his auto rikshaw documents. Though P.W.9 is also treated as hostile witness and cross-examined by learned Sr.APP., he has denied that accused used to charge interest on above loan and he had given statement before I.O. as per Ex.P25.
16. P.W.10 Venkataramanappa S/o Chinnaiah, who is said to be the other panch of Ex.P1, has also turned hostile by testifying that he signed Ex.P1 mahazar at police station about three years back as per Ex.P1(e) and he does not know contents of said document. Though this witness is also treated as hostile and cross-examined at length by learned Sr.APP, nothing worth while is elicited form his mouth to prove seizure of incriminating materials from accused as per Ex.P1 mahazar.
17. P.W.11 Dr.B.S.Sudhakar S/o Bheemasena the then PI of CCB (F & M) and I.O. of this case has stated in his evidence that on 11-3-2019 in view of sufficient evidence he filed charge sheet against accused by 12 C.C.No.6680/2019 taking necessary permission from his superior. Entire evidence of this witness is also denied by defence side and it is suggested to him that he has filed false charge sheet, though accused is innocent.
18. P.W.12 M.C.Ravikumar S/o M.Chandru the then PI of CCB has testified in his evidence that on 10-10-2018 he took up further investigation of the case from Vijayanagar police and thereafter on the same day he visited the house of accused situated at Panchasheelanagar, 1st main for conducting search along with C.Ws.2 and 3 panchas. He has further stated that he explained matter to accused and produced Sl.No.1 to 14 of documents of PF No.12/2018, which were seized by him under Ex.P1. P.W.12 has further testified that on same day he filed requisition before court seeking to incorporate Sec.420 of IPC, he issued notice to accused to appear for interrogation and on 16-10-2018 he issued notices to Vijaya Bank, ICICI Bank, HDFC 13 C.C.No.6680/2019 Bank seeking information with regard to seized cheques under Ex.P1. He further stated that he recorded statements of C.Ws.7 to 11 and he has identified seized documents as per Exs.P2 to P20, his signature on Ex.P1 as per Ex.P1(f), signature of accused as per Ex.P1(g), Sl.No.9 and 10 books seized under Ex.P1 mahazar as per Exs.P26 & P27. In cross-examination entire evidence of this witness is also denied by defence side and it is suggested to him that though accused is not indulged in illegal money lending business, he has lodged false case for statistical purpose and there is no nexus between seized documents and accused.
19. Thus on perusal of entire evidence of prosecution, it shows that except evidence of official witnesses and interested witnesses, absolutely there is nothing on record to prove that accused is indulged in illegal money lending business and she is charging exorbitant interest on such loans. 14 C.C.No.6680/2019 Further both independent mahazar witnesses i.e., P.W.7 and P.W.10 have turned hostile. Further so called independent witnesses-cum-borrowers i.e., P.Ws.5, 6, 8 and 9 have also turned hostile by testifying that the accused has not done any illegal money lending business and they have also denied that accused has received interest on such loans. Further the accused has denied her very nexus with seized documents. Except evidence of official witnesses, there is nothing on record to prove that accused is indulged in such illegal money lending business, she has charged exorbitant interest as per case of prosecution. For these reasons, prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubts that accused has committed offences punishable under sections 41, 38 Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961 R/w IPC and u/s 3 and 4 of Karnataka Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant 15 C.C.No.6680/2019 Interest Act, 2004. Hence point no.1 and 2 are answered in the Negative.
20. Point No.3: -
For the reasons stated and findings given on point No.1 and 2, following is:
ORDER Acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused is acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 41, 38 of Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961 R/w IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of Karnataka Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2004.
The bail bond and surety bond executed by accused shall continue for a period of two months from the date of this order and thereafter same shall stand canceled automatically.
( Typed by me directly on computer, revised, corrected by me and then pronounced in open court on this the 8 th day of April 2022).
(Anand T Chavan) st 1 Addl. CMM., Bengaluru 16 C.C.No.6680/2019 ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for prosecution :-
P.W.1, Venkatachalaiah, P.W.2, Yogeshwar Rao, P.W.3, Suresh, P.W.4, Vidhyashree, P.W.5, Devaraj, P.W.6, Umesh, P.W.7, Mallesh K.H. P.W.8, Mamatha, P.W.9, Shankar, P.W.10, Venkataramanappa, P.W.11, Dr.B.S.Sudhakar, P.W.12, M.C.Ravikumar;
List of exhibits marked for prosecution :-
Ex.P1, Mahazar,
Ex.P1(a), Signature of P.W.1,
Ex.P1(b), Signature of P.W.3,
Ex.P1(c), Signature of P.W.4,
Ex.P1(d), Signature of P.W.7,
Ex.P1(e), Signature of P.W.10,
Ex.P1(f), Signature of P.W.12,
Ex.P2 to
Ex.P9, Cheques,
Ex.P10 to
Ex.P12, Three E-stamps,
Ex.P13 to
Ex.P16, Four Diaries,
Ex.P17 &
Ex.P18, RC books of autorickshaw,
Ex.P19 &
Ex.P20, Two sale deeds,
Ex.P21, Complaint,
17 C.C.No.6680/2019
Ex.P21(a), Signature of P.W.1,
Ex.P22, Statement of P.W.5,
Ex.P23, Statement of P.W.6,
Ex.P24, Statement of P.W.8,
Ex.P25, Statement of P.W.9,
Ex.P26 &
Ex.P27, Books,
List of material object :
NIL
List of Witnesses examined for defence:-
NIL List of documents marked for defence:-
NIL 1st Addl. CMM., Bengaluru.18 C.C.No.6680/2019
(Judgment pronounced in the Open Court) ORDER Acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused is acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 41, 38 of Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961 R/w IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of Karnataka Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2004.
The bail bond and surety bond executed by accused shall continue for a period of two months from the date of this order and thereafter same shall stand canceled automatically.
I ACMM, Bengaluru.