K.S. Rathore, J. - (1.) The present criminal revision petition under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the order dated 14.02.2008 passed by the District & Sessions Judge, Jaipur District, Jaipur in Criminal Revision No. 14/2007 whereby the revision petition filed by the respondent No.2 has been allowed and order dated 29.01.2007 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Chomu District, Jaipur in Misc.Application No.45/2007 has been set aside and application filed by the petitioner seeking 'Supurdgi ' of mini bus bearing No.RJ -14 -PA -0390 was allowed.
(2.) The revisional Court has set aside the order dated 29.01.2007 and ordered to release the vehicle in question in favour of its registered owner -Shivnath Shastri.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that mini bus was financed by the petitioner company to respondent No.2. The respondent No.2 Shivnath has not paid the installments of the loan amount. It is further submitted that the revisional court has erred in quashing the order dated 29.01.2007 passed by learned Magistrate. He place reliance on the judgment delivered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Orix Auto Finance (India) Ltd. Vs. Jagmander Singh & Anr, reported in, 2006(1) A C J 675 (S.C.) :, 2006 (2) SCC Page 598, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that besides the loss of value of truck in case of non -user thereof, security of the financier's dues also ought to be taken into consideration.;