SACHIN YADAV & ORS Vs. RAJENDRA KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as 'the Code') the applicants are praying for quashment of the proceedings initiated and for quashment of cognizance dated 20th June, 2016, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhabua, in Criminal Case No.1056 of 2016 and the complaint. The learned Magistrate committed a grave error of law in taking cognizance of the offence under Section 379, IPC, after expiry of the period of three years from the date of alleged incident against the mandatory provisions of Section 468 of the Code, which provides that no Court should take cognizance of any offence after expiry of the period of three years.

(2.) The facts of the case are that on 14.10.2014, a private complaint was filed by the respondent - complainant against the applicants. It was alleged in the complaint that the respondent purchased a Mini-door Tempo from Kisan Automobiles on 25.11.2015, by getting it financed from Shriram Finance Company. On 24.08.2006, when the vehicle was given for servicing to Kisan Automobiles show room, Applicant No.2 and 3 who were employees of Sai Automobile at the instructions of applicant No.1, took forcible possession of the vehicle. On notice by the respondent to Sai Automobile, the vehicle was not return back to the complainant hence, a private complaint was filed by the complainant against the applicants on 14.10.2014 for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467 and 468 / 34, IPC, after approximately 8 (eight) years. Para 1, 2 of the complaint is relevant, which reads as under :-

(3.) The cognizance was taken by the trial court only for offence under Section 379 of IPC against the applicants vide order dated 20.6.2016. On 25.7.2017, the trial Court issued a perpetual arrest warrant against the applicants.