ALOK KUMAR GUPTA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is directed against the order dated 10.09.2003 passed by Sri K. Lal, learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, sherghati (Gaya) in complaint Case No. 95/03 whereby he has taken cognizance of the offences under Sections 379, 323 and 504 of the I.P.C. and directed for issuance of summons.

(2.) COMPLAINANT Mahendra Mishra filed the aforesaid complaint stating, inter alia, that he had purchased a truck bearing Registration No. BR-l6G-5l5l from M/S Tewari Bechar which was financed by M/S Paragon Finance Ltd., Kokar, Ranchi, in pursuance of an agreement prepared between the parties. It has been stated that the complainant had paid a total sum of Rs. 5,33,636/- through instalments to M/s Paragon Finance Ltd. and a further sum of Rs. 1,66, 642/-to M/s Tewari Bechar. It is alleged that at about 4 P.M. on 12.03.2003, while the said truck was enroute to Bihta from Jamshedpur, carrying scraps and had reached near Dobhi, Alok Kumar Gupta, the petitioner herein, alongwith ten others came on a Sumo Car, stopped the truck, dragged out the driver and Khalasi and abused and assaulted them. It is further alleged that where as Alok Kumar Gupta snatched away Rs. 3000/-from the pocket of the driver, upon his orders the battery and axle of the vehicle were removed as a result whereof the complainant had been put to a loss of Rs. 5000/-. It has also been asserted that the incident was communicated to him by the driver over telephone on 14.03.2003 following which he approached the police of Dobhi and Barachatty where no action was taken. He then approached the S.P. at Gaya, who directed the Officer Incharge, Barachatty Police Station for taking action but instead the complainant was insulted and chided by the Barachactty Police. Hence, he approached the court through the complaint. It was also asserted that the complainant had suffered loss due to the high handed less of the accused who had not only committed theft and criminal breach of trust but had also cheated him.

(3.) IT appears that the complainant took a loan of Rs. 66,000/- on 9.8.2001 from the said Company against the truck bearing Registration No. BR-16G-5151 for a period of six months and as per the agreement (Annexure-1) he was to pay Rs. ll,000/- per month on the 9th o: of each succeeding calendar month starting from September, 2001. IT is stated that the complainant again purchased a bus in the name of his full brother, Jay Kumar Mishra, bearing Registration No. BR - 41P - 1730 on hire purchase basis from the Company and took a total loan of Rs. 8,17,000/-(inclusive of Finance charges of Rs. 34, 2000/-) and pledged his truck bearing Registration No. BR-16G-5151 with a stipulation that the loan amount would be repaid in 36 monthly instalments, each of Rs. 22, 700/-from 22.4.2001. The copy of Hire Purchase Agreement has been appended as Annexure-2 to the petition. IT is alleged that the complainant failed to make the payment of the full amount of loan. IT is further said that on 5.3.03, the complainant filed an affidavit (Annexure-3) before the Company admitting therein, inter alia, that he had taken a loan of Rs. 4,75,000/- from the Company for purchasing the bus bearing Registration No.BR-4IP-1730 and that he had pledged his truck No. BR-16G-5151 to the Company against the said loan. IT was also stated therein that although the said bus stands registered in the name of Jay Kumar Mishra, but in fact it was he who was responsible for plying and looking after the said vehicle and also to make the payments of the loan amount and that for the same he alongwith his brother Jay Kumar Mishra are jointly and severally liable.