RADHANATHPAL Vs. TARAPADA GHOSH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revisional application is directed against the order dated 4-1-1991 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate at Arambagh rejecting the naraji petition with complaint and also rejecting the prayer for staying the return of the bus bearing WBS 2577 to the accused opposite-parties.

(2.) The petitioner lodged a complaint before the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Arambagh on 20-12-1983 alleging inter alia that one Tapas Bhattacharjee and others obtained a Route Permit on the Arambagh-Parakeswat-Garerghat route (16/20 Route) from the Regional Transport Authority. The said Tapas Bhattacharjee and others were unable to ply the bus on the said route for financial difficulties and as such on their request the present petitioner purchased the permanent route permit from Tapas Bhattacharjee and others and purchased the bus No. WBS 2577 in 1970 from Ganesh Narayan Brijlal Ltd. on Hire Purchase System to fun the same by virtue of the said route permit. The petitioner afterwards has repaid all the dues with proper receipts. The accused opposite-party No. 11 was the guarantor for sale. Accordingly, Tapas Bhattachaijee and others executed a Deed of Agreement which is valid upto 2076 A.D. and General Power of Attorney in favour of the petitioner on 30-8-1977 to run the bus according to the said route permit. The petitioner became the sole owner of the bus in question and of the route permit. The petitioner then began to run the bus with accused-opposite party No, Tarapada Ghosh, as Manager and Conductor. As it was necessary to repair the bus, the petitioner acting on the advise of accused opposite party No.1, gave the bus to the garage of Han Sharma and accused opposite party No. 1, Tarapada Ghosh was entrusted with looking after the bus. One day the bus was taken to Chinsurah without the pernlission of the petitioner and all the papers were seized by the police. Then one Jivan Krishna Mishra was entrusted to look after the bus. Then on 3-12-1983 the accused opposite party No.1 with the conspiracy of other accused opposite parties tried to sell the bus at Calcutta and the said Jivan Krishna Mishra lodged a diary at the police station of Khanakul and the Police, Officer kept the said bus at the police station as unclaimed property. On receipt of information, the petitioner went to Khanakul Policc Station on 4-12-1983 and from there to the Regional Transport Authority in Hooghly and came to learn that all the accused-opposite parties had fraudulently transferred the said bus to their names. The petitioner, therefore, lodged complaint under Sections 408/379/411 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate passed an order under Section 156(3), Cr. P.C. for police investigation.

(3.) The Investigating Officer submitted a final report on 9-1-1988 without any enquiry and examination of witnesses. The petitioner raised objection against the final report and the learned Magistrate directed for re-Investigation and against that order the accused-opposite parties moved this Court in revision and the case was disposed of with a direction to the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate at Arambagh for custody of the vehicle in accordance with law after giving an opportunity to both the contending parties. After re-investigation the Investigating Officer again filed a final report The petitioner through his Advocate filed a naraji petition with complaint alleging all the facts of mala fide and biased investigation and further made an application for n6t releasing the said bus bearing No. WBS 2577 till the disposal of the naraji petition with complaint. The learned Magistrate did not treat the naraji petition as a complaint but only as a protest against the investigation and accepted the final report and discharge the accused-opposite parties. The seized, bus was also directed to be returned to the registered owners of the bus.