ASHOKBHAI VASUDEV EZHAVA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition which is filed under section 482 of the code of Criminal Procedure, petitioners have prayed to quash and set aside FIR No-146 of 2001 registered at Dani Limda Police Station for the commission of the alleged offences punishable under sections 379, 447, 448, 427 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC' for short) on the basis of the complaint filed by respondent No-2 against the petitioners.

(2.) Having heard Mr. H.M.Parikh, learned advocate for the petitioners, Mr. N.D. Gohil, learned APP for respondent No.1 - State and Mr. G.T.Dayani, learned advocate for respondent No.2 - and on having perusal of the averments made in the petition and the grounds made in the impugned complaint, I am of the opinion that there is a prima facie case against the present petitoners for commission of the crime alleged against them. Mr. Parikh, learned advocate for the petitioners is unable to persuade this court how the complaint does not disclose the prima facie offence against the petitioners. It is true that the petitioners are creditors whereas respondent No.2 is a debtor as there was outstanding dues of Rs.3,40,000 - to the petitioners from respondent No.2 and in that connection one machine Lupagater had already been handed over to the petitioners. The alleged incident has taken place on 10-12-2001 while the petitioners forcibly, with the help of a crime, lifted one another machine in the presence of the watchman. Therefore, according to me, there is a prima facie case against the petitioners for their invovement in the offence alleged against them.

(3.) In the case of State of Karnataka v. M.Devendrappa, 2002 0 AIR(SCW) 286 the Supreme Court has said that in a petition filled under section 482 for quashment of the complaint it is not proper for the High Court to have a meticulous analysis of the case before the trial to find out whether the case would end in conviction or acquittal.