Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Sivadasan Vs. State of Kerala

Sivadasan vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jul 04, 2014
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1154769

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sivadasan

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....punishable under sections 3 and 17 of the kerala money lenders act and secs.3 and 9(a) of the exorbitant interest act, 2012 and has filed this application.2. learned public prosecutor has opposed the application. it is submitted that the de facto complainant borrowed rs.15,000/- but the petitioner charged exorbitant interest. it is also submitted that the petitioner collected signed blank cheques and demand promissory notes.3. learned counsel submitted that the allegations are not true. the de facto complainant borrowed rs.1,00,000/- from the petitioner and issued cheque for the discharge of that liability. petitioner has filed complaint against the de facto complainant under sec.138 of the negotiable instruments act.4. it is revealed that there was no seizure of any incriminating documents from the petitioner. having regard to the b.a. no. 4810 of 2014 -:2. :- circumstances of the case i am inclined to grant relief but subject to conditions. application is allowed as under: (i) petitioner shall surrender before the officer investigating crime no.606 of 2014 of the pudunagaram police station on 14.07.2014 at 10.00 am for interrogation. (ii) in case interrogation of the petitioner is not completed that day, it is open to the investigating officer to direct presence of the petitioner on any other day/days and time which the petitioner shall comply. (iii) in case the petitioner is arrested, he shall be released by the arresting officer on bail on his executing bond for rs.15,000/- (rupees fifteen thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each before the arresting officer and and subject to the following conditions: (a) one of the sureties shall be a close relative of the petitioner. (b) petitioner shall report to the officer investigating the case as and when required for interrogation. (c) petitioner shall not get involved any offence during the period of this bail. b.a. no. 4810 of 2014 -:3. :- (d) petitioner shall not engage in money lending.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE4H DAY OF JULY2014/13TH ASHADHA, 1936 BAIL APPL..NO. 4810 OF2014() -------------------------------------------- CRIME NO. 606/2014 OF PUDUNAGARAM POLICE STATION , PALAKKAD PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED: -------------------------------------- SIVADASAN AGED45YEARS S/O.LATE KITTU, MANIANKAD HOUSE, MURUGANI C.N.PURAM P.O., PUTHUR, PALAKKAD BY ADVS.SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN SMT.P.G.BABITHA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM -682 031.

2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER PUDUNAGARAM POLICE STATION, PUDUNAGARAM PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 678 105. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI V.S. SREEJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON0404.2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.

==================================== B.A. No.4810 of 2014 ==================================== Dated this the 04th day of July, 2014 ORDER

Petitioner apprehends arrest in Crime No.606 of 2014 of the Pudunagaram Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 17 of the Kerala Money Lenders Act and Secs.3 and 9(a) of the Exorbitant Interest Act, 2012 and has filed this application.

2. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application. It is submitted that the de facto complainant borrowed Rs.15,000/- but the petitioner charged exorbitant interest. It is also submitted that the petitioner collected signed blank cheques and demand promissory notes.

3. Learned counsel submitted that the allegations are not true. The de facto complainant borrowed Rs.1,00,000/- from the petitioner and issued cheque for the discharge of that liability. Petitioner has filed complaint against the de facto complainant under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

4. It is revealed that there was no seizure of any incriminating documents from the petitioner. Having regard to the B.A. No. 4810 of 2014 -:

2. :- circumstances of the case I am inclined to grant relief but subject to conditions. Application is allowed as under: (i) Petitioner shall surrender before the Officer investigating Crime No.606 of 2014 of the Pudunagaram Police station on 14.07.2014 at 10.00 am for interrogation. (ii) In case interrogation of the petitioner is not completed that day, it is open to the investigating Officer to direct presence of the petitioner on any other day/days and time which the petitioner shall comply. (iii) In case the petitioner is arrested, he shall be released by the arresting officer on bail on his executing bond for Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each before the arresting officer and and subject to the following conditions: (a) One of the sureties shall be a close relative of the petitioner. (b) Petitioner shall report to the Officer investigating the case as and when required for interrogation. (c) Petitioner shall not get involved any offence during the period of this bail. B.A. No. 4810 of 2014 -:

3. :- (d) Petitioner shall not engage in money lending business without permission of the appropriate authority. (e) Petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses. (iv) In case the petitioner violates any of conditions (b) to (e), it is open to the investigating Officer to move the jurisdictional magistrate for cancellation of the bail as held in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala (AIR 2006 SC100. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial