NAURAT MAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition arises under sections 482/397 Cr. P.C. against the order of the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Gulabpura by which he has taken cognizance against the accused under s. 406 I.P.C.

(2.) The facts necessary to be noticed for the decision of this petition briefly stated are: that a complaint was filed before the S.H.O. Badnore by one Rahimudeen that he has given his tractor on rent to the accused-petitioner Rs. 100/- per day with this condition that the accused-petitioner will bear the expenses of the driver, diesel and repairs etc., and he will pay him Rs. 100/- but the petitioner has not paid him that amount and when the arrears of the rent were demanded, the petitioner has taken the plea that he has already purchased the tractor but no written document was executed between the parties to evidence the sale and, therefore, the accused has fralldulently retained the possession of the tractor, trolly, and cultivator etc. After investigation, the investigating officer came to the conclusion that actually, the tractor has been sold to Naurat Mal for a sum of Rs. 26, and on different dates, he has paid Rs. 10,000/- to the owner and he has also deposited Rs. 2,000/- in the Bank which was taken by the complainant as Loan from the Bank on this tractor & even the remaining instalments were also to paid by the petitioner. The investigating officer has come to he conclusion that because the document of higher purchase was not got written, the complainant malafidely demanded the possession of the tractor back from the petitioner and, therefore, no case is made out against the petitioner. The learned Magistrate took the view that although the sale has been executed but no receipt to the payment of, Rs. 10,000/- has been obtained and, therefore, as the document of the tractor exits in favour of the complaint, prima facie a case under s. 406 I.P.C. is made out against the accused-petitioner.

(3.) I have heard Mr. T.S. Champawat, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner, Mr. B.C. Bhansali, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and Mr. M.M. Singhvi, learned counsel for the complainant. I have carefully gone through the record of the case.