R.R. Prasad, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No.2 as well as learned counsel appearing for the State.
(2.) The order dated 29.08.2012 passed in Sonari P.S. Case No.100 of 2011 [G.R. No.1872 of 2011] under which cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken against the petitioners, is being sought to be quashed on the ground that accepting the entire allegation made in the complaint petition to be true, no such offences are made out.
(3.) It is the case of the complainant that the complainant was the rightful owner of a vehicle, namely, TATA MT TIPPER bearing Registration No.JH05R -8889 which had been purchased under the hire-purchase agreement and had been hypothecated to the financial institution. After the termination of hypothecation, agreement arrived at, in between the petitioners and the complainant whereby it was agreed that the petitioners would be plying the vehicle in day time and in the evening, the same would be parked in front of the house of the opposite party No.2. For some period, the petitioner parked the vehicle in front of the house of the opposite party No.2, but other day it was found that it has not been parked in front of the house of the opposite party No.2. When the matter was inquired into, it was found that the vehicle had been parked in front of the house of the petitioners. The complainant, having found that, asked the petitioner as to why he had parked the vehicle over there. On hearing this, the petitioner started abusing the complainant in filthy language and also held out threat by saying forget the vehicle and leave the place otherwise both of you will be done to death.;