NIZAM Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused Nos.1 and 2 came up to quash the FIR registered on the allegation of offence under Section 420 IPC r/w Section 15(1) Motor Vehicles (Amendment 2015) Act. The accused No.1 is a broker, who engaged in the sale of vehicles. The vehicle was originally belonged to accused No.5, from whom the defacto complainant purchased it. Later on it was purchased by accused No.2, then accused No.3 and then accused No.4. The vehicle met with an accident causing injuries to a third person and later on he succumbed to the injuries. The accused No.4 subsequently, committed suicide.

(2.) The crime was registered on the allegation that, though the vehicle was sold to the petitioner, then to accused No.2, then to accused No.3 and then to accused No.4, no application was submitted for effecting the transfer of ownership in accordance with the provisions contained in the Motor Vehicles Act. A motor vehicle is also a movable property and would come under the purview of Sale of Goods Act as far as the sale is concerned.

(3.) The mere fact that, it was not transferred in the name of purchaser as per the provisions contained in the Motor Vehicle Act will not vitiate the sale already effected. The violation of the said provisions would attract penalty under Section 15(1) of the Motor Vehicles (Amendment 2015) Act. The crime was registered for the offence under Section 420 IPC and 15(1) of Motor Vehicles (Amendment 2015) Act without knowing what actually constitutes cheating as defined under Section 415 IPC. I am at a loss to understand why a crime was registered under Section 15(1) of Motor Vehicles (Amendment 2015) Act, wherein a penalty alone is liable to be imposed for the violation of the said requirement.