Sri. Ravi N Alias Ravi Vs the State of Karnataka — Cheating and Forgery | Karnataka HC (2025)

Sri. Ravi N Alias Ravi Vs the State of Karnataka — Cheating and Forgery | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Criminal Petition allowed; the entire proceedings in Crime No.98 of 2024 registered by Brucepet Police Station, Ballari for offences punishable under Section 420, 435, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of the IPC quashed as against the petitioners (accused Nos.1 and 2).

Issue for consideration

Whether the complaint and FIR in Crime No.98/2024 (Brucepet P.S., Ballari) and the criminal proceedings arising therefrom, pending before the I Addl. Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) and JMFC, Ballari, against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 for offences under Sections 420, 435/465, 468, 471 r/w 34 IPC, are liable to be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. read with Section 528 BNSS 2023. +1 more

Court's answer

There is no specific allegation as against accused No.1 and he is undisputedly not the borrower of the loan from the Bank.

Ratio / Principle

Since accused No.2 had repaid the entire loan borrowed with interest much prior to the Bank approaching the police, it cannot be said that she had any intention to cheat the Bank.

Key takeaways

Merely because the loan borrowed was not utilized for the purpose for which it was borrowed, it cannot be said that the borrower had intention to cheat the Bank, where the material on record shows that the loan was repaid with interest; the loan was availed for purchasing sewing machines for a Garment Factory and, it being found infeasible to start the factory, the borrower repaid the amount with interest.ratio¶¶44
Criminal proceedings cannot be lodged on any assumption or presumption; accordingly, the petitioners' prayer for quashing the impugned criminal proceedings as against them deserves to be granted.ratio¶¶44

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing of FIR/Criminal Proceedings — Section 482 Cr.P.C. read with Section 528 BNSS 2023 — Cheating and forgery charges under Sections 420, 435 (cause title: 465), 468, 471 r/w 34 IPC — Petitioners, accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.98/2024 of Brucepet P.S., Ballari, alleged to have misused loans availed under the Prime Minister's Rojgar Scheme at a subsidized rate of interest for purchase of sewing machines that were never purchased — Loan of Rs.4,96,000/- repaid with interest on 16.08.2023, i.e., prior to the first information dated 10.04.2024 (a lapse of nearly 8 months) — HELD: (i) repayment of the entire loan with interest prior to the Bank approaching the police negatives any intention to cheat; (ii) mere non-utilization of the loan for the purpose for which it was borrowed does not establish intention to cheat where the loan stands repaid with interest; (iii) criminal proceedings cannot be lodged on assumption or presumption; (iv) there is no specific allegation against accused No.1, who was undisputedly not the borrower — Criminal Petition allowed; proceedings quashed as against petitioners. (Single Judge: S. Vishwajith Shetty, J.)

NC: 2025:KHC-D:10520 CRL.P No. 100472 of 2025

1 -

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100472 OF 2025 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

SRI. RAVI N. @ RAVI S/O. B. NAGARAJ, AGE. 36 YEARS, OCC. TEMPORARY EMPLOYEE, R/O. W NO.7, NEAR RAM MANDIR, BAPUJI NAGAR, DIST. BALLARI-583 101.

SMT. BHARATHI W/O. RAVI N., AGE. 31 YEARS, OCC. PROPRIETOR OF MANJULA ENTERPRISES, R/O. W.NO.7, D.NO.75, MAIN ROAD, NEAR RAM TEMPLE, BAPUJI NAGAR, DIST. BALLARI-583 101.

… PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. RAJA RAGHAVENDRA NAIK, ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by RAKESH S RAKESH HARIHAR S Location: HIGHCOURT OF HARIHAR KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH BRUCEPET P.S., BALLARI DISTRICT, R/BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH AT DHARWAD.

CHIEF MANAGER, PADMA SRINIVAS REDDY M. S/O. THIMMA REDDY M., AGE. 40 YEARS, BANK OF BARODA, BALLARI BRANCH VADDARABANDE, DIST. BALLARI-583 101.

… RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. MALLIKARJUN S. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. (UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT AND FIR REGISTERED AGAINST PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2 BEFORE BRUCEPET P.S. CRIME NO.98/2024 FOR THE

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:10520 CRL.P No. 100472 of 2025

HC-KAR

OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 420, 465, 468, 471 R/W 34 OF IPC, PENDING IN THE COURT OF I^ST ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE, JUNIOR DIVISION AND JMFC COURT, BALLARI, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER IS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)

Accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.98 of 2024

registered by Brucepet Police Station, Ballari for offences punishable under Sections 420, 435, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of the IPC, are before this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. read with Section 528 of BNSS 2023, with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings in the aforesaid case, as against them.

Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

loan of ₹4,96,000/- was borrowed by the petitioners for the purpose of purchasing sewing machines in the proposed Garment Factory, which the petitioners intended to setup. The entire loan amount borrowed was repaid with interest on 16.08.2023 itself. FIR in the present case is registered

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:10520 CRL.P No. 100472 of 2025

HC-KAR

on 10.04.2024 for the alleged offences, much after the petitioners’ had repaid the entire loan amount and were discharged by the Bank. He accordingly prays to allow the petition.

Per contra, learned HCGP and the learned counsel for respondent No.2 have opposed the petition.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that loan was sanctioned on a subsidized rate of interest and the loan amount which was released to the petitioners was not utilized for the purpose for which it was sanctioned. Therefore, criminal case has been registered against them. He however does not dispute that the entire loan amount was repaid by the petitioners on 16.08.2023 itself.

In the first information dated 10.04.2024, which is submitted by respondent No.2, it is alleged that accused Nos.2 to 11 named in the FIR had availed loans from the

Bank under the Prime Minister's Rojgar Scheme, at a subsidized rate of interest for the purpose of purchase of

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:10520 CRL.P No. 100472 of 2025

HC-KAR

sewing machine. Subsequently, it came to the notice of the Bank that the sewing machines were not purchased by the borrowers and it is under these circumstances the authorized representative of the Bank had approached the police alleging that the scheme was misused by the accused persons and thereby they had cheated the Bank as well as the State.

It is not in dispute that the entire amount of loan borrowed by accused No.2 has been repaid by her with interest to the Bank as on 16.08.2020 itself. Accused No.1 is the husband of accused No.2 and it appears that he was earlier working as a temporary employee in the Bank for a short period. There is no specific allegation as against accused No.1 and undisputedly he is not the borrower of loan from the Bank. First information is submitted in the present case on 10.04.2024, which is after a lapse of nearly 8 months from the date accused No.2 had repaid the entire loan borrowed by her from the Bank with interest. Since accused No.2 had repaid the entire loan borrowed with

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:10520 CRL.P No. 100472 of 2025

HC-KAR

interest, much prior to the Bank approaching the police, it cannot be said that she had any intention to cheat the Bank.

Merely for the reason that the loan borrowed was not utilized for the purpose for which it was borrowed, it cannot be said that the borrower had intention to cheat the Bank when the material on record would go to show that the loan borrowed was repaid with interest. The loan was availed for the purpose of purchasing sewing machines to setup a Garment Factory and according to the learned counsel for the petitioners, since it was not found feasible to start the Garment Factory, the borrower had decided to repay the amount with interest, and if that is so, it cannot be said that the loan was borrowed with an intention to cheat. Criminal proceedings cannot be lodged on any assumption or presumption and therefore, I am of the opinion that the prayer made by the petitioners for quashing the impugned criminal proceedings as against them needs to be granted. Accordingly, the following:

6 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:10520 CRL.P No. 100472 of 2025

HC-KAR

ORDER

i. Criminal Petition is allowed.

ii. The entire proceedings in Crime No.98 of 2024 registered by Brucepet Police Station, Ballari for offences punishable under Section 420, 435, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of the IPC, is quashed as against the petitioners are concerned.

Sd/(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)

JUDGE

VNP, KGK CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 32