AJITH KUMAR Vs. STATE AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in both these cases is the defacto complainant in Crime No.960 of 2011 of Punalur Police Station and he filed the above applications to quash the common order passed in Crl.M.P.Nos.9649 of 2011 and 9427 of 2011 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-III, Punalur under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) It is alleged in the petitions that the crime was registered on the basis of the complaint given by him against the accused persons alleging offences under Sections 471, 468, 465, 420, 419, 417, 406, 403 and Section 120 B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) The case of the petitioner was that the petitioner's mother was the registered owner of the tipper lorries bearing Registration Nos.KL 2E/8038 & KL 2E/8039. She died on 06.03.2002. After that, on 17.10.2008, the father and step- mother of the petitioner forged the signature of deceased Sudharmadevi, the mother of the petitioner and submitted papers before the Regional Transport Office, Punalur and got the vehicles transferred in the name of Sodaran, the father of the petitioner. When he came to know about the same, he filed the above complaint on the basis of which a case has been registered. Using the registration certificate, his father had transferred the vehicles to the 1st respondent in Crl.M.C.Nos.3440 of 2011. During investigation, the investigating officer seized the vehicles from the possession of the 1st respondent in Crl.M.C.Nos.3440 of 2011 and produced the same before the court. The petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.9649 of 2011 while 1st respondent in Crl.M.C.Nos.3440 of 2011 filed Crl.M.P.No.9427 of 2011 for interim custody of the vehicles. After enquiry, by the impugned Annexure A common order, the learned Magistrate allowed Crl.M.P.No.9427 of 2011 and dismissed Crl.M.P.No.9649 of 2011 and ordered interim custody of the vehicles to the petitioner in Crl.M.P.No.9427 of 2011 on executing a bond for Rs. 3,50,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like sum each and with further condition that he shall produce the vehicles before court as and when directed and shall not alienate, modify or alter the vehicles without the permission of the court. Dissatisfied with the common order of the learned Magistrate, the petitioner has filed the above applications before this Court to quash the order.