Allowed

Muthoot Capital Services Ltd, v. Narayananunni

Kerala HC28 Oct 2019Crl.MC/5967/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal miscellaneous petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought quashing of proceedings under the Kerala Money Lenders Act. The High Court found that the dispute was personal and had been settled, with no public interest involved. Consequently, the proceedings were quashed.

What did the court decide?

The entire proceedings against the petitioners in case C.C. No.173/2016 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palakkad, are hereby quashed.

Muthoot Capital Services Ltd, Vs Narayananunni — Money Laundering | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶4

MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 6TH KARTHIKA, 1941

¶5

Crl.MC.No.5967 OF 2019(E)

¶6

C.C.NO.173/2016 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PALAKKAD

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶8

1 MUTHOOT CAPITAL SERVICES LTD, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, PALAKKAD BRANCH, G.B.ROAD, PALAKKAD-678 001.

¶9

2 THE MANAGER, MUTHOOT CAPITAL SERVICES LTD, PALAKKAD BRANCH, G.B.ROAD, PALAKKAD-678 001.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.B.J.JOHN PRAKASH

¶11

RESPONDENTS/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT AND STATE:

¶12

1 NARAYANANUNNI, AGED 57 YEARS S/O MADHAVAN, PANGALKALATHIL HOUSE, THAZHEMURALI, PUTHUPARIYAM, PALAKKAD-678 731.

¶13

2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.

¶14

BY ADVS.

¶15

R1 SRI.P.PRAMEL SRI E C BINEESH-PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

Crl.MC.No.5967 OF 2019(E) 2

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

This is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing

¶20

the proceedings against the petitioners in the case C.C.No.173/2016 on the file of the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palakkad.

¶21

The petitioners are the accused in the aforesaid case. The offences alleged against them are punishable under Sections 7, 9, 13 and 17 of the Kerala Money Lenders Act, 2012 and also under Sections 3 and 9 of the Kerala Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2012. The 1^st respondent is the de facto complainant in the case. It is submitted that the matter has been settled between him and the petitioners. Therefore, it is prayed that the proceedings against the petitioners in the case may be quashed.

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the the 1^st respondent and also the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶23

I have perused the affidavit filed by the 1^st respondent, who has entered appearance through counsel. It is stated in the affidavit filed by him that the matter has been settled between him and the petitioners and that he has got no further compliant against the petitioners. I am satisfied that

¶24

Crl.MC.No.5967 OF 2019(E) 3

¶25

the settlement arrived at between the parties is genuine.

¶26

Though the offences under the Kerala Money Lenders Act and the Kerala Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act are alleged against the petitioners, it is seen that the present case is one instituted against them on the basis of the private complaint filed by the 1^st respondent. The dispute between the parties is purely personal in nature. There is no element of public interest involved in the case. In these circumstances, I find that this is a fit case in which the power of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C can be invoked to quash the proceedings against the petitioners in the case.

¶27

Consequently, the petition is allowed. The entire proceedings against the petitioners in the case C.C. No.173/2016 on the file of the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palakkad, are hereby quashed.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

LEK

¶32

Crl.MC.No.5967 OF 2019(E) 4

¶33

APPENDIX

¶34

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶35

ANNEXURE A1

¶36

CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PALAKKAD

Muthoot Capital Services Ltd, v. Narayananunni

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muthoot Capital Services Ltd, v. Narayananunni

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Linto.v.R Vs State of Kerala

Sujith.T., Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

Rajkumar.K.S., Vs State of Kerala

Dr. Hazeeb Rahman Vs State of Kerala

Sony Wilson Vs State of Kerala

Hisham M Vs State of Kerala