JIJO Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petition filed under Section 482, Cr. P. C. for quashing of the proceedings in CC No. 8546/99. The petitioners are the accused against whom the State had laid the charge sheet for committing offences punishable under Sections 407 and 420, IPC. The first petitioner is the owner of the lorry in question, accused 2 is the driver of the lorry. According to prosecution version, the lorry in question was hired by Amrut Distilleries Limited for transportation of liquors to be delivered to Kerala State Beverage (Manufacturing and Marketing) Corporation Limited at Kerala, Amrut Distilleries had entered into a contract of transport of its goods with the Reliable Transport Service. The Reliable Transport Service had in turn had hired the lorry in question from Balamurugan Roadways for transportation of the goods in question. It is said that after the goods were loaded, the petitioners misappropriated the goods and did not deliver the same at the destination point. The Police after registration of the crime, investigated and filed the charge-sheet.

(2.) THE trial Court after hearing the accused, passed an order that there is sufficient material to frame charge against the petitioners under Sections 407 and 420, IPC. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present petition is filed.

(3.) IT is the contention of the petitioner that the Court at Bangalore had no jurisdiction to try the case. In that regard relied on the Ruling of this Court in M/s. Mysore Manufacturers and Traders, Bangalore v. M/s. Ray Choudhary, Madras, 1978 Cri LJ 577. When the goods are entrusted for delivery at certain place, if the delivery is not made on account of misappropriation, the Court within whose local jurisdiction the place of delivery situate has jurisdiction to try the offence under sub-section (4) of Section 181 of Cr. P. C.