RADHASHYAM DAS Vs. GOURISANKAR RATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused in Complaint Case no. 138 of 1981 is the petitioner. The order of the learned Magistrate dated 14.12. 1981 where under the Magistrate took cognisance of the offence under Sections 406 and 420, Indian Penal Code, is being impugned 'in the present revrsron.

(2.) THE complainant is an advocate of Bhubaneswar Bar and filed a complaint petition on 6 11,1981 alleging that the accused with whom a refrigerator belonging t6 the complainant had been delivered for repair did not part with the refrigerator by illegally demanding a sum of Rs. 350/ -as Cost of repair. According to the complaint petition, even though the Head Office of the Company directed delivery of the refrigerator without any charge for repair, but the accused illegally demanded the money and retained the refrigerator as the complainant did not part with the repair charges. It was further alleged that the accused was using the refrigerator for himself ' though it was entrusted to him only for repairs. The Magistrate took the Initial statement of the complainant and then directed an inquiry under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In the inquiry, the complainant was examined and his driver was also examined. On consideration of these materials, the learned Magistrate took cognisance of the offences under Sections 406 and 420, Indian Penal Code and directed issuance of summons. Thereafter the complainant filed an application for issue of a search warrant under Section 94 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for recovery of the refrigerator in question and the learned Magistrate allowed the same, but as the correct address of the accused had not been given the warrant had not been executed.