- (1.) SEEKING quashing of the First Information Report relating to the Singur police Station Case No. 178/07 dated September 8, 2007 under Section 403/409/411/414/120b of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court moved the instant criminal revisional application.
(2.) THE foundation of the impugned FIR are as follows : (a) The complainant who happened to be the registered owner of the Truck bearing No. WB-15a-1788 purchased the said vehicle by obtaining a loan of Rs. 6. 50 lakhs from the opposite party no. 1 ING Vysya Bank Ltd. under a hire Purchase agreement. The terms of repayment of the loan was by 47 equal installments @ Rs. 16,457/-per installment. The complainant out of total loan amount paid back Rs. 2,61,500/- to the accused Banker and in addition to that spent Rs. 3 lakhs for making body and cabin of the driver and also paid the seed money of Rs. 56,200/- and further a sum of Rs. 10,000/- and Rs. 7,000/- to the accused banker. All such payments were made against proper and valid receipts. The said loan was taken by the complainant on December 28, 2004. However, on august 7, 2006 the said truck was snatched away by the accused persons with the help of some unknown miscreants. The complainant then and there informed about the same to the respective authorities and after sometime approached the bank for return of the truck in question as the complainant did not concede to his request the complainant moved the District Consumer Forum for necessary relief. However, his petition before the District Consumer Forum was dismissed on June 26, 2007. Thereafter, the accused bank assured the complainant that he will be sufficiently compensated however without compensating him and without his consent the accused bank sold out the said truck in question to a third party inspite of the fact that a major portion of the loan amount has been liquidated. According to the complainant the accused bank by taking away the vehicle forcibly from his possession and then disposing the same to a third party by way of sale has criminally misappropriated the entire consideration amount and thereby committed an offence of criminal breach of trust.
(3.) THE learned Counsel Mr. Mujibar Rahaman submitted before this court in the facts and circumstances of the instant case and more particularly when in terms of the default clause contained in the Hire Purchase agreement the financier repossess the vehicle after fulfilling all the obligations arising out of such Hire Purchase agreement no offence of criminal breach of trust can be said to have been committed by the financier. He further submitted that the allegations contained in the petition of complaint at its highest may tends to make out a case of a dispute in civil nature. Mr. Rahaman further produced before this Court a copy of the aforesaid Hire Purchase agreement and the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party after examining the same raised no dispute as to the authenticity thereof.;