DILIP. M Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Govt. Pleader.

(2.) Petitioner has been arrayed as Accused No.4 in Crime No.87/2020 on the file of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sec. 364A, 323, 506 and 507 of IPC. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is aged about 27 years and his health is riddled with issues, particularly perforation of the intestine and that he has undergone invasive procedure for the same. That the complaint does not disclose the name of the petitioner and that no overt-act is attributed against the petitioner. On perusal of the complaint it is seen that the complaint is directed against unknown persons. Further perusal of the remand application would detail monetary transaction between the accused and the complainant wherein, it is alleged that a sum of Rs.50,000.00 and interest amount of Rs.20,000.00 have been seized.

(3.) Per contra, the learned Govt. Pleader would submit that the accused are indulging in charging exorbitant interest. That the same is prohibited and that the victim was kidnapped with an intention of coercing the complainant to part with exorbitant sum by way of interest. On a query as to whether any bleeding or cut injuries have been caused, the learned Govt. Pleader replies in the negative. The petitioner has also placed on record the medical records to demonstrate the plea of ill health. On perusal of the same, the document titled as initial discharge summary, records the ailments has imperforated anus and Sigmoid Colostomy.