VIJAYA KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner herein is arrayed as an accused in FIR registered by the respondent -Police in respect of the offence punishable under Sec. 4 of the Karnataka Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2004 and Sec. 420 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

(2.) The case is registered as a suo motu report of the Head Constable of the Police Station whereby he suspects that the petitioner -accused is involved in finance business and imposing exorbitant interest. He receives blank cheques, blank stamp papers from the common people and also levy compound interest on the loan amount. Subsequent to the registration of the FIR police have seized from the premises of the petitioner certain incriminating materials like sale deeds, sale agreements, bank pass books, etc.

(3.) Sri G. Shankar, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that any of the allegations made in the FIR are not true and only on suspicion a false and frivolous complaint is lodged. During the Mahazar, certain documents are said to have been shown. These documents do not belong to him and cheques are out dated and cannot be used as evidence in the Court of law. He is not a money lender. The police has to ascertain as to whether he is a money lender or not and any aggrieved person as a debtor has paid excess or exorbitant interest and also any case being registered in any police station. The other material recovered from his possession are sale deeds and sale agreements which are his own documents. Nobody have complained any harassment from him. The title deeds pertaining to such victims is not seized during mahazar from his possession. The complaint allegation does not attract ingredients under Sec. 420 of IPC. The entire action of the respondent is abuse of process of law and have to be quashed.