LAWS(GAU)-2012-6-12

STANDARD FINANCE (P) LTD. Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

Decided On June 04, 2012
STANDARD FINANCE (P) LTD Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ASSAM, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, GAUHATI HIGH COURT, GUWAHATI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision, made under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has put to challenge the order, dated 23-08-2004, passed, in Complaint Case No. 266C/2004, whereby the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, having taken cognizance of offences, under Sections 406, 420, 379 and 506 IPC, directed issuance of notice and search warrant for recovery of vehicle, bearing registration No. AS-06/A 3145, from the custody of accused Alok Ranjan Saikia and Gopal Morain.

(2.) NONE has appeared on behalf of the petitioners as well as the private respondent. However, Mr. D Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, is present and he is accordingly heard.

(3.) THEREAFTER, the opposite party No. 2 herein, namely, Nagen Duwarah, lodged a complaint case, which gave rise to Complaint Case No. 266C of 2004, wherein he stated that he was the rightful and legal purchaser of the vehicle, bearing registration No. AS-06/A 3145, from Sri Alok Ranjan Saikia, who had come forward to sell the same, at Rs. 4,15,000/-, by saying that the said vehicle was free from encumbrances, charges, etc, but strangely enough, on 13-08-2003, the vehicle was taken away by the accused showing that the vehicle was hypothecated with M/S Standard Finance (P) Ltd. and the loan amount had not been liquidated, the intention of the accused being to cheat the complainant, Sri Nagen Duarah. This apart, accused Sri Alok Ranjan Saikia and Sri Gopal Marial had threatened the complainant. Based on this complaint and on the basis of the statement of the complainant, an order was made by the learned Magistrate, in Complaint Case No. 266C of 2004, taking cognizance of offences under Sections 406/420/379/506 IPC and also directing issuance of notice to accused Sri Alok Ranjan Saikia and Sri Gopal Marial to produce the vehicle, in the Court, on or before 20-09-2004, and it is this order, dated 23-08-2004, which stands impugned in the present revision.