NAGARAJ Vs. MOHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision is preferred against the order dated 7-6-1985 passed by the Sessions Judge, Shimoga, in Cr. R.P. No. 13/85.

(2.) The facts relevant for the disposal of this revision may, briefly, be stated as under : The petitioner H.P. Nagaraj (who will be hereinafter referred to as the complainant) filed a complaint under Section 200 Cr. P.C. before the II Additional Munsiff & J.M.F.C. (II Court), Shimoga against the respondents (who will be hereinafter referred to as the accused) for offences punishable under Sections 406 and 465 I.P.C. The material allegations levelled against the accused in the complaint were that the 1st accused Mohan took forcible possession of the complainant's Matador van bearing Registration No. CNS 4933, having got up false documents by obtaining signatures of the complainant on blank papers and also on a stamp paper by force with the help of Parameswarappa the P.S.I. of Old Town Police Station, Bhadravathi and subsequently obtained a power of attorney from the complainant in respect of the vehicle by persuading him to execute the same on the pretext that he would run the vehicle for hire and pay the balance loan amount due to the Karnataka State Financial Corporation (K.S.F.C.) obtained by the Complainant for which the mother of the 1st accused was the guarantor. The complainant having executed the document felt suspicion on the bona fides of the 1st accused since the 1st accused soon after obtaining the power of attorney, filed a caveat in the Court of the Munsiff at Shimoga respecting the vehicle. So he revoked the power of attorney executed by him in favour of the 1st accused by issuing him a notice and demanded return of the vehicle to him. Since the 1st accused refused to return the vehicle the complainant preferred the complaint referred above.

(3.) The Magistrate referred the complaint to the P.S.I. (Crime Branch), Doddapet Police Station, Shimoga for investigation under Section 156(3) Cr. P.C. The P.S.I., Doddapet Police Station, on receipt of the complaint, registered the crime in Crime No. 40/85 and took up investigation. In the course of the investigation of the crime, the P.S.I. seized the matador van on 11-2-1985 and reported the seizure to the Magistrate and obtained permission to retain the vehicle in his custody pending submission of the final report. On the same day, that was on 11-2-1985 the 1st accused filed an application under Section 457 Cr. P.C. before the Magistrate for release of the vehicle in his favour. On 12-2-1985, the complainant also filed a similar application under Sections 451 and 457 Cr. P.C. to release the vehicle in his favour. During the pendency of the bearing of these two applications, the P.S.I having completed the investigation, placed the chargesheet against the accused on 13-3-1985. While producing the documents along with the chargesheet, the P.S.I. had informed the Court that the records pertaining to the seizure of the vehicle had already been submitted to the Court on 11-2-1985.