HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 28
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 46762 of 2013
Applicant :- Akashdeep Singh And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- L.M.Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Saurabh Srivastava,Shrawan Dwivedi
Hon’ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. L.M.Singh, learned counsel for applicants and learned A.G.A. representing opposite party No. 1 is present. In spite of revision of cause list, no one has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party No. 2, even though Mr. Saurabh Srivastava and Mr. Shrawan Dwivedi have put in appearance on behalf of opposite party No. 2 and their names are duly published in the cause list.
This application under section 482 Cr. P. C. has been filed challenging entire proceedings of Case No. 275 of 2013 (State Vs. Akash Deep Singh and another), under Sections 406 IPC, Police Station Ghatampur, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ghatampur, Kanpur Dehat.
Present application came up for admission on 19.02.2004 and this Court passed the following interim order:-
“It has been argued that the F.I.R. has been lodged after a period of three years. The truck in question was infact never entrusted to the applicants but it was infact purchased by them. It appears to be a fit case to call for counter affidavit of the other parties.
Learned AGA has received notice on behalf of opposite party No.1. He may file counter affidavit within a period of four weeks.
Issue notice to opposite party No.2, who may also file counter affidavit within the same period. Rejoinder affidavit if any, may be filed within two weeks’ thereafter.
List after six weeks.
Till the next date of listing, proceeding of Case No.275 of 2013 arising out of Case Crime No.120 of 2012, under Section 406 I.P.C., Police Station Ghatampur, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Ghatampur, Kanpur Dehat, shall remain stayed.”
However, in compliance of order dated 19.2.2014, no counter affidavit has been filed by opposite party No. 2, even though notices have been served upon opposite party No. 2 as is evident from the Office report dated 19.11.2017.
It transpires from record that opposite party No. 2 lodged an F.I.R. dated 23.3.2012 showing the date of occurrence as 10.5.2011. In the aforesaid F.I.R., it was alleged that the applicants Akashdeep Singh and Driver Ramlu had taken away the truck of the first informant and consequently it was prayed that criminal case be initiated against the accused persons. Aforesaid F.I.R. was registered as Case Crime No.120 of 2012, under Section 406 I.P.C., Police Station Ghatampur, District Kanpur Nagar, in which Akashdeep Singh and Driver Ramalu were nominated as named accused. Police upon completion of statutory investigation of aforesaid case crime number in terms of Chapter XII Cr. P. C. submitted charge sheet dated 4.2.2013 against both the named accused. Upon submission of aforesaid charge sheet 4.2.2013, cognizance was taken on 1.4.2013 by Civil Judge (J.D.) Ghatampur, Ramabai Nagar, vide cognizance taking order dated 1.4.2013. Consequently, State case No. 275 of 2013 (State Vs. Akashdeep Singh and another), under Section 406 IPC, P.S. Ghatampur, District Kanpur Nagar came to be registered. Applicants have been summoned by Court below, vide summoning order dated 1.4.2013 passed by Civil Judge (J.D.), Ghatampur, Ramabai Nagar in above mentioned State case. Feeling aggrieved by entire proceedings of above mentioned State case, applicants have now approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr. P. C.
Learned counsel for applicants submits that no offence can be said to have been committed by present applicants. He further submits that the contents of F.I.R. are contrary and it is admitted by opposite party No. 2 that the disputed truck was sold by him in favour of applicant No. 1. He thus submits that applicant No. 1 moved an application for transferring his name as owner of the dispute truck. In support of his claim, he placed reliance on Annexure 4 to the affidavit at page 31 of the paper book, which is a letter issued by Regional Transport Officer regarding change of status of disputed truck. In the aforesaid letter dated 24.05.2012, a recital is contained that amount of consideration has been paid by applicant No. 1 to the opposite party No. 2 by cheque.
On the aforesaid factual premise, learned counsel for applicants submits that there was no entrustment as contemplated under Section 406 IPC, hence no offence has been committed by present applicants. Police has submitted charge sheet without properly investigating and without considering the legal aspect of the matter, as in the letter dated 24.5.2012, the applicant No. 1 has been directed to appear before Office of Regional Transport Officer, Kanpur, so that the papers submitted by him regarding transfer of registration may be verified.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the present application, but he could not dispute the submissions urged by learned counsel for applicants.
In rejoinder, learned counsel for applicants submits that present criminal proceedings initiated by opposite party No. 2 are nothing else, but an abuse of process of the Court. In support of his submissions, he has placed reliance in the case of M/s Eicher Tractors Ltd. Vs. Harihar Singh and another, 2008 (16) SCC, 763.
In view of above, present application succeeds and is allowed.
Accordingly, entire proceedings of Case No. 275 of 2013 (State Vs. Akash Deep Singh and another), under Sections 406 IPC, Police Station Ghatampur, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ghatampur, Kanpur Dehat are, hereby, quashed.
Order Date :- 25.2.2020