- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14129 CRL.P No. 9567 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9567 OF 2018 (482(Cr.PC)/ 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. BALU K. S/O KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/O NO.316, 4TH MAIN, 4TH CROSS, VIDHYAGIRILAYAOUT, CHANDRALAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 040. 2. SMT. SUNITHA W/O K BALU, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/O NO.316, 4TH MAIN, 4TH CROSS, VIDHYAGIRILAYAOUT, CHANDRALAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 040. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MALIPATIL P.S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CHANDRALAYOUT PS BENGALURU - 560 040 BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14129 CRL.P No. 9567 of 2018 2. AARTHI RAJESH W/O RAJESH N R/O NO.204, II FLOOR, PRUTHVI APARTMENT, 13TH CROSS, CAUVERY LAYOUT, G M PALAYA, NEW THIPPASANDRA, BENGALURU - 560 075. 3. RAJESH N. S/O S NANJAPPA, R/O NO.204, II FLOOR, PRUTHVI APARTMENT, 13TH CROSS, CAUVERY LAYOUT, G M PALAYA, NEW THIPPASANDRA, BENGALURU - 560 075. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. DIVAKARA, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET DATED 26.06.2018 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 i.e., CHANDRA LAYOUT POLICE IN C.C.NO.19449/2018 ON THE FILE OF VIII ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 448 AND 506 OF IPC AND SECTION 5, 38, 39 AND 41 OF KARNATAKA MONEY LENDERS ACT, 1961 AND ALSO U/S 3 AND 4 OF KARNATAKA PROHIBITION OF CHARGING EXORBITANT INTEREST ACT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14129 CRL.P No. 9567 of 2018 ORAL ORDER Petitioners are seeking to quash the charge sheet and the proceedings in C.C.No.19449/2018 pending before the VIII Additional CMM Court at Bengaluru, registered for the offence punishable under Section 448, 506 of IPC, Section 5, 38, 39 and 41 of Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961 and Section 3 and 4 of the Karnataka Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2004. 2. The material on record would disclose that respondent Nos.2 and 3 herein sent a complaint dated 20.07.2015 to the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Central Crime Branch, Bengaluru, alleging harassment and life threat by the petitioners. It is alleged that the petitioners being money lenders have lent some amount to the complainants but they were charging exorbitant interest on the said amount and posing threat to their life etc. 3. On receiving the above complaint, forwarded by the office of the Deputy Commissioner of Police, the Police Inspector, CCB F & M, N T pet, Bengaluru City lodged a - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14129 CRL.P No. 9567 of 2018 suo-moto complaint against the petitioners for the aforementioned offences. It is alleged that accused No.1 was charging 9% interest on the loan borrowed by the complainants and harassing them demanding more interest. Further, the accused were demanding higher interest from the public by forcing them to sign on blank stamp papers and cheques etc. 4. Copies of the deed of guarantee dated 09.06.2015 entered between petitioner No.1 and the complainants are produced by the learned counsel for petitioners. The said documents does not bear the signatures of either of the petitioners. According to the prosecution, the accused were charging exorbitant interest from the general public and in that connection certain documents were seized from their house. However, there is no complaint lodged by any of them. Vague allegations are made that the accused were posing life threat etc. Deed of guarantee dated 09.06.2015, wherein petitioners are shown as the second party, does not bear their signatures. It is further seen that in the said document - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:14129 CRL.P No. 9567 of 2018 there is no mention about 9% interest as alleged by the prosecution. 5. There are no sufficient materials against the petitioners to prosecute them for the offences alleged. It is submitted by the learned counsel for petitioners that no loan was lent to the complainants as alleged and the entire allegations are false. She contended, petitioners are no not claiming any money from the complainants. 6. In light of the above, petition deserves to be allowed. Hence, the following: ORDER Petition is allowed. The entire proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.19449/2018 pending on the file of VIII Additional CMM Court at Bengaluru are quashed. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE HB/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30