ARJUN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On an apprehension of arrest in connection with Crime No. 0398 of 2020 registered with Karmad Police Station, District Aurangabad, for the offence punishable u/s. 406 of the IPC , the applicant has preferred this Application seeking anticipatory bail.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant-accused and learned APP representing the respondent-State. Perused the first information report as well as the copy of the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and photo copy of the agreement to sell of the vehicle entered between the father of the informant and one Dnyaneshwar Galdhar.

(3.) In brief, it is the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that the complaint lodged is false and frivolous and nothing but abuse of process of law on the part of the informant. It is submitted that the applicant is no way concerned with the vehicle referred in the complaint. In fact, the vehicle referred in the complaint was owned by the father of the informant, who has secured loan through Finance Company, namely, Shriram Finance Company. On 07.02.2018, the father of the informant entered into an agreement with Dnyaneshwar Pandurang Galdhar to sell the said vehicle for the sum of Rs.4,97,000/- on the terms and conditions incorporated in the agreement of sale executed on 07.02.2018. The amount of Rs.95,000/- was paid to the father of the informant and balance amount of Rs.4,02,000/- to be payable to Shriram Finance Company with whom the vehicle was hypothecated. There was default on the part of the alleged purchaser in paying the installments due and payable to Shriram Finance Company. Due to said default, the officials of the Company approached the informant to take custody of the vehicle. The officials of the Finance Company disclosed to informant that the amount of Rs.2,42,000/- is due and payable towards vehicle purchased by his father. Therefore, the applicant approached the applicant and Dhananjay and asked as to why they committed default in payment of installment to Shriram Finance Company. In the light of the allegations made in the complaint, learned counsel submits that the allegations made in complaint itself discloses no prima facie case to attract offence under Section 406 of the IPC against the applicant.