MOHANACHANDRAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITION under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, "Cr.P.C."). Petitioners are accused 1 and 2 in Sessions Case No.184 of 2006 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Kottarakkara. Offence revealed from Annexure-A2, final report is punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, "IPC"). 2nd respondent in this proceedings is the defacto complainant. Allegations in Annexure-A1, first information statement, shortly stated, are the following: 2nd respondent is the proprietor of Grace Travels, engaged in operating tourist buses. Bus bearing registration No. KL-2/7858 was in the name of his wife. On 15.06.2004, the tourist vehicle was plying on a contract with passengers on it. At about 8 a.m., the bus was forcibly taken possession of the petitioners and other accused persons. After registering a crime, Police started investigation and filed final report (Annexure-A2) alleging that petitioners along with other accused committed dacoity punishable under Section 395 of IPC.

(2.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioners and the 2nd respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is no dacoity involved in this case, because the 2nd petitioner on behalf of the financier company was exercising their right of repossession of the vehicle on account of the breach in payment of the amounts stipulated in the agreement. 1st petitioner is implicated in the case only because the vehicle was garaged in his premises.