IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA WRIT PETITION NO.32009 OF 2015(GM-RES) & WRIT PETITION NO.32955 OF 2015(GM-RES) BETWEEN:
1. SMT PREMAMMA W/O LATE JAVAREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O. CHANNASANDRA VILLAGE, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571401 2. RAJANNA.M.K.
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O MARASINGANAHALLI VILLAGE, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571401 ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI: D S HOSMATH, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS MADDUR CIRCLE POLICE MADDUR DISTRICT MANDYA-571401 2. LAKSHMANA S/O SANNAIAH, AGED: MAJOR R/O CHANNASANDRA VILLAGE, MADDUR DISTRICT MANDYA-571401 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: I.S.PRAMOD CHANDRA, SPP-II FOR R1 R2-SERVED & UNREPRESENTED) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W. SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS AND QUASH FIR NO.717/2015 REGISTERED IN CRIME NO.0299/2015 DTD.11.7.2015 WITH THE R-1 POLICE VIDE ANNEX-A.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned SPP-II for respondent No.1. Respondent No.2 is duly served and unrepresented.
2. The petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with section 482 of Cr.P.C., to quash the FIR No.717/2015 in Crime No.0299/2015 dated 11.07.2015 of Maddur Police Station registered for the offences punishable under sections 504, 506 of Indian Penal Code, sections 5 and 39 of Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961 and sections 3 and 4 of Karnataka Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2004.
3. The material allegation made against the petitioners herein is that the complainant had borrowed loan of Rs.50,000/-
with 5% interest from petitioner No.1/accused No.1 and another loan of Rs.50,000/- with 5% interest from petitioner No.2/accused No.2 for agricultural purpose, by executing two on-demand promissory notes and two cheques. According to the complainant, though he had repaid the entire loan amount with interest, the petitioners herein failed to refund the cheques and on-demand promissory notes to the complainant and when the complainant demanded return of the said documents, the petitioners issued threat to the complainant. In the complaint, it is alleged that in respect of very same cheques and on-demand promissory notes, the petitioners have filed civil suit. That being the case, the allegations made in the complaint cannot be sustained.
Hence, the petitions are allowed. The proceedings against the petitioners in F.I.R. No.717/2015 in Crime No.0299/2015 dated 11.07.2015 of Maddur Police Station are quashed.
Sd/- JUDGE Bss