BINOD KUMAR THARAD AGARW-ALLA Vs. PRANAB DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY making this application under Section 482 Cr. P. C. , the petitioner has prayed for setting aside and quashing the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 600c/2004 including the order, dated 23. 03. 2004, passed therein by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (II), Guwahati, whereby cognizance of offence under Section 379 IPC has been taken, summons have been directed to be issued to the petitioner as accused and search warrant for recovery of the Truck Bearing Registration No. AS-25a-7429.

(2.) I have heard Mr. G. N. Sahewalla, learned Senior counsel, for the accused-petitioner. None has appeared on behalf of the complainant-opposite party.

(3.) BEFORE coming to the merit of this revision, it is necessary to take note of the material facts, which have given rise to this revision. The petitioner and the opposite party herein had entered into a Hire Purchase Agreement, whereunder the Truck Bearing Registration No. AS-25a-7429 was purchased with Sunita Finance Company as the financer, the petitioner herein being the proprietor of Sunita Finance Company. On the failure of the opposite party to pay his dues, the financer took over the possession of the said Vehicle on 03-03-2004. Reacting to the act of repossession of the Vehicle by the petitioner, the opposite party lodged a complaint in the learned Court below alleging, inter alia, that the petitioner had, without giving any prior notice, forcibly taken away the truck from the National Highway. Based on this complaint, cognizance of offence under Section 379 Cr. P. C. was taken against the petitioner and issuance of summons and also search warrant, as indicated hereinbefore, were ordered. It was at this stage that the present petitioner came to this Court with the present application made under Section 482 Cr. P. C.