ARJUN KRISHNA Vs. SUDHEESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed by the 1 st accused to quash Annexure A4 Final Report and all further proceedings in C.C.No.493/2020, on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-I, Thamarassery, ('Trial Court', in short), which has originated from Crime No.1057/2019 registered by the Thamarassery Police Station, Kozhikode, alleging the commission of the offences punishable under Ss. 406, 420, 465, 468 and 471 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, ('IPC', in short).

(2.) The essence of the 1st respondent's (de facto complainant) case in the complaint (Annexure A1) is that, on 17/3/2016, the 1st respondent had purchased a lorry bearing registration No. KL-73A-5253 from a distributor by paying Rs.12,10,600.00, out of which, he availed a vehicle loan for Rs.9,07,000.00. He registered the vehicle in his name and, on an oral agreement, he entrusted the vehicle to the 2nd accused along with the original documents, to manage the vehicle, subject to the condition that the 2 nd accused would remit the equated monthly instalments towards the loan amount to the financier, and after the loan account is closed, he would hand over possession of the vehicle to the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent also paid Rs.3,00,000.00 for the building of the body of the vehicle. The vehicle's records were handed over to the 2 nd accused in the presence of two witnesses. In the meantime, the 2nd accused went abroad. Later, he informed the 1st respondent that he had already handed over the vehicle to his brother, the petitioner (1st accused), in March 2019. As requested by the accused, the 1 st respondent had sent a letter to the finance company to close the loan account and a 'No Objection Certificate' was issued. Despite repeated requests made by the 1st respondent, the 1st accused failed to return the vehicle and the original documents. On enquiry, it was learnt that the 1st accused had transferred the vehicle to his name by forging the 1 st respondent's signature. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.

(3.) I have heard, Shri. Prabhu K.N., the learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri. Luiz Godwin D. Couth, the learned counsel for the 1st respondent and Shri.C.S. Hrithwik, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.