BALBIR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under S. 432 Crimial P.C. is directed against the order, dated 27th Nov., 1989 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Kishangarhbas who dismissed the revision filed by the petitioner against the order of learned Judicial Magistrate, Kishangarhbas dated 11th Oct., 1989 refusing to release the truck bearing registration No. DIG 6297 on supurdginama to him.

(2.) Brief facts leading to this petition are that one Nasru Khan had lodged a report at police station Khairthal District Alwar on 30-5-89 alleging that he is the owner of Truck Operators Association, Alwar. On 15th May, 1989 Jaisingh alias Om Prakash driver of the truck bearing No. DIG 6297 approached him and asked him to load the truck 189 bags of mustard were loaded for being transported to Dehradun. It was alleged that the goods did not reach Dehradun and the Driver embazzled the goods in the way. Case for offence under S. 406 and 420 Penal Code was registered and investigation commenced. The aforesaid Truck No. DIG 6297 was seized. The petitioner who was guarantor as well as power of Attorney holder of Financer moved an application for delivery of the truck on supurdaginama. It is pertinent to mention here that Jaisingh one of the owners along with Satvir Singh had also applied for supurdaginama of the said truck, but for reasons best known he did not press the application and got it dismissed was not pressed. The petitioner's application was rejected on the ground that if the track is delivered to him then it will be difficult to apprehend the accused Satvir Singh. It is against this order of rejection, having failed to get any relief from the revisional court, the petitioner has approached this court.

(3.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the vehicle is lying at the police station to nobody's care ever since the date of its seizure which is 7th June, 1989. It is submitted that financers are entitled to the custody of the truck in view of the fact that since Satvir and Jaisingh had not paid instalments towards it and had committed breach of agreement. It is submitted that the only amount of Rs. 24,000.00 had been credited to the account out of the hire-purchase price of Rs. 2,79,100.00. It is submitted huge amount is outstanding against Satvir Singh and Jaisingh who have not cared to pay the outstanding amount. It is submitted that Balvir Singh has been given special power of attorney by the financer which has been placed on the record. The only reason on which the custody of the track has been refused by the trial court was that it would not be possible to appended Satvir Singh if the truck is given on supurdaginama.