MANMOHANVEER SINGH AND ORS. Vs. STATE AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant miscellaneous petitions under section 482 CrPC, 1973 have been filed by the accused petitioners for assailing the order dated 22.12.2007 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sri Ganganagar in Criminal Case No.518/2007, whereby cognizance was taken against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 382 read with Section 120-B as well as the order dated 28.06.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Sri Ganganagar in criminal revision affirming the order passed by the learned Magistrate.

(2.) Facts in brief are that the respondent No.2, complainant, filed an FIR No.216/2000 at the Police Station Jawahar Nagar through a complaint forwarded from the court under section 156 (3) CrPC, 1973 alleging inter alia that he had got financed a bus No.RJ-13-0877 from the Ashoka Finance Company, Sri Ganganagar in the year 1994. As per the prevalent practices of the finance companies, accused Lekhraj and Ishwardas Gupta took signatures of the complainant on numerous blank papers, forms, affidavits, stamps and Form Nos.29 and 30. The complainant inquired about the reasons for getting his signatures on the blank papers and blank forms, on which, he was apprised that this was being done to ensure the security of the loan amount. The complainant was further assured that these blank papers would not be misused and he should continue to repay the loan instalments. In the month of January 2000, the accused Lekhraj, Ishwardas Gupta and Yashpal Gupta informed the complainant that a total sum of Rs. 70,000/- was due against the loan account and if he paid the same, hypothecation clause would be deleted from the registration certificate of the bus. The complainant claims to have paid the said amount of Rs. 70,000/- to the accused and requested for issuance of No Dues Certificate and so also for getting the hypothecation clause deleted from the registration certificate. However, the accused resiled from their promise and forcibly snatched away the bus on 09.04.2000. The Investigating Officer conducted thorough investigation into the matter and filed a negative final report observing that the case pertained to a dispute of payment of money and was of civil nature. The complainant submitted a protest petition and got his own and his witnesses' statements recoded under sections 200 and 202 CrPC, 1973. The learned Magistrate, proceeded to consider the negative final report, protest petition and the statements recorded in support thereof and took cognizance against the accused Lekhraj, Ishwardas Gupta, Subhash Soni, Yashpal Gupta for the offences under Sections 382, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC. Cognizance was taken against Dr. Bhajan Lal Rolan, DTO, and Manmohanveer Singh, Notary (petitioner in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.1159/2011) for the offence under Section 120-B IPC and the accused were directed to be summoned through warrants of arrest.

(3.) As stated above, the order taking cognizance stands affirmed by the revisional court by separate orders dated 28.06.2011 passed in Criminal Revision No. 67/2009 (Ishwardas and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.) and 68/2009 (Manmohanveer Singh v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.). Both these orders are assailed by the respective accused in this bunch of miscellaneous petitions filed under section 482 CrPC, 1973.