JOY VARGHESE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the accused in C.C. No. 105 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Koothattukulam. In the aforesaid case , he faces indictment for offence under Sections 394 r/w Section 34 of the IPC.

(2.) Essentially the allegation is that the petitioner, while working as the Manager of a finance company repossessed the vehicle by taking law into his own hands and in the course of the commission of the offence assaulted CW2 .

(3.) One of the contention of the defence is that the financier was entitled to repossess the vehicle as per the terms of the hire purchase agreement. It was for substantiating the said contention that he had filed the application before the learned Magistrate requesting for the summoning of the Branch Manager of the Finance Company to produce the original of the Hire Purchase agreement, the authenticated copy of an Arbitration award and also the attested copy of the accounts of the defaulter. The learned Magistrate after considering the contentions of the petitioner and the learned prosecutor rejected the prayer by a detailed order holding that the petitioner can very well produce these documents at the stage of tendering evidence at the defence stage. The said order is under challenge.