DHAVAL DINESHBHAI DESAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner ­ original accused has filed this Revision Application against the order dated 19.8.1999, passed below Exh.1 in Criminal Case No. 410 of 1991 by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.5, Ahmedabad, whereby the learned Magistrate has rejected the prayer for discharge made by the petitioner ­ accused by application (Annexure-"A") dated 6.5.1999.

(2.) HEARD learned Counsel Mr. A.D. Shah, appearing for the petitioner, learned APP Mr. H.L.Jani, appearing for the respondent No.1 ­ State and learned Advocate Mr. Soni for Mr. Patel, appearing for respondent No.2 ­ original complainant.

(3.) LEARNED Advocate Mr. Soni, appearing for Mr. Patel for the original complainant has contended that, no doubt, there is delay in filing the complaint. He has contended that there is deal of purchase of machinery between both the parties, however, the petitioner ­ accused has refused to hand over the machinery and that conduct is required to be considered that he has committed the offence under Sections 405 & 406 of I.P Code. I have . also heard learned A.P . Mr. Jani.