Karnataka High Court
Shekarappa S/O Narasappa Itagi vs The State Of Karnataka, Yelburga on 18 December, 2015
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
Dated this the 18th day of December 2015
Before
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
Criminal Petition No.102117/2015
Between:
Shekarappa, S/o Narasappa Itagi,
Occ: Farmer (Agriculturist),
Age: 60 years, R/o: Mudhol,
Tq: Yelburga, Dist: Koppal. ...Petitioner
(By Sri Amare Gouda, Advocate)
And:
1. The State of Karnataka, Yelburga PS,
Dist: Koppal, Represented by the
State Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench at Dharwad.
2. Vinayaka, Occ: P.S.I. Officer,
Aged about 42 years,
R/o Police Station Yalburga,
Dist: Koppal. ...Respondents
(By Sri Praveen K.Uppar, HCGP)
This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking
to quash the complaint and FIR registered against the petitioner
:2:
for the alleged offence by the Yelburga P.S. in Crime No.81/2015
on 21.07.2015 for the offence punishable under Sections 38 & 39
of Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961 and Sections 3 & 4 of
Karnataka Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2004
read with Section 420 of IPC, pending on the file of Principal
Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) & JMFC Court, Yelburga, Koppal District.
This petition coming on for Admission this day, the Court,
made the following:
ORDER
Though this matter is listed for admission with the consent of both the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.
2. This petition is filed by the petitioner under 482 of Criminal Procedure Code requesting the Court to quash the proceedings registered in Crime No.81/2015 for the alleged offences under Sections 38 & 39 of Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961 and Sections 3 & 4 of Karnataka Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2004 read with Section 420 of IPC, pending on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and JMFC Court, Yelburga, Koppal District.
3. Brief facts of the case as per the complaint averments are that respondent No.2 lodged a complaint alleging that the :3: petitioner lent loan to the people and loan was collecting exorbitant rate of interest from them. The petitioner is a farmer. Since many years and as per the allegations made, some people borrowed the amount from the petitioner. He obtained the order for search warrant from the JMFC Court. On the basis of the information, raid was conducted by the 2nd respondent, panchas went to the house of the petitioner along with his staff. If is further alleged in the complaint that the 2nd respondent found some e-stamp papers, hand loan papers, which belonged to different persons. On enquiry, it is alleged that the 2nd respondent came to know that the petitioner had been doing money lending business without obtaining valid licence and apart from this, he has been charging exorbitant interest. On the basis of the said complaint case has been registered against the present petitioner.
4. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused and also the learned Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
:4:
5. Counsel for the petitioner made the submission that the mandatory procedure is not followed in this case under the provisions of the Karnataka Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2004. It is his submission that the debtor has to deposit the amount before the Court along with interest and he has to bring it to the notice of the Court about the allegations as against the present petitioner and he is not supposed to directly approach the police nor the police can register the case in the manner that is done in this case. Hence, the counsel submitted that the procedure contemplated under Section 5 of the said Act is not followed in this case. He also submitted that under similar set of facts and circumstances, this Court has already quashed the proceedings. Hence, he submitted to allow the petition.
6. Learned Government Pleader made the submission that this Court has already taken a decision in other similar matters. Hence, he submitted that he is leaving the matter to the Court to pass appropriate orders.
:5:
7. I have perused the grounds urged in the petition and also the documents produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his case. Looking to the allegations made in the complaint, the offences alleged are under Karnataka Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2004 i.e., under Sections 3 and 4. When that is so, the procedure contemplated under Section 5 of the said Act is to be followed. Section 5 of the said Act reads as follows:
5. Deposit of money and presentation of petition to court and the procedure thereof.-
(1) A debtor may deposit the money due in respect of a loan received by him from any person together with interest at the rate fixed by the State Government under section 28 of the Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961 into the Court having jurisdiction, along with a petition to record that the amount deposited is in full or part, satisfaction of the loan including the interest therefor, as the case may be.
(2) The Court shall, on receipt of a petition under sub-
section (1), refer a copy of the petition to the person mentioned in the petition, directing him to give his replies within a period of fifteen days as may be granted by the Court. The Court may, after due inquiry and after considering the versions of both the parties, pass orders recording the satisfaction of the loan and interest therefor in full or in part, as the case may be." :6:
8. This Court has already disposed of similar petitions referring to the said provisions. Looking to these aspect of the matter, registration of the complaint by respondent NO.2 directly in the police station without approaching the appropriate Court itself is illegal and it is not maintainable in law. Petitioner has made out a case. Therefore, the petition is allowed and the proceedings initiated against the petitioner in Yelburga P.S. Crime No.81/2015 pending on the file of Prl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) & JMFC Court, Yelburga, Koppal District, is hereby quashed.
However, liberty is reserved to the police to proceed in accordance with law under the provisions of the Act and to take appropriate action in the matter.
In view of disposal of the petition I.A.No.1/2015 does not survive for consideration and the same is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE Kms