Judgment:
Crl.
Misc.
not M- 4796 of 2011 ----1-- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Crl.
Misc.
not M- 4796 of 2011 Date of decision.
22.01.2013 Bhupinder Pal ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK Present:- Mr.R.S.Ghuman,Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms.Shivali, AAG, Punjab Mr.Rakesh Punj, Advocate for respondent no.2.
-- VIJENDER SINGH MALIK, J.
Bhupinder Pal, the petitioner has brought this petition under the provisions of section 482 Cr.P.C.for quashing of FIR No.2 dated 04.01.2011 registered at Police Station Koom Kalan, District Ludhiana City (Annexure P-1).for an offence punishable under section 407 IPC alongwith all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
Crl.
Misc.
not M- 4796 of 2011 ----2-- Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the complainant was not paying the dues of the petitioner and the petitioner did not misappropriate the goods of the complainant but had only kept them at the truck union to seek his dues from him.
According to him, the petitioner was working as a carrier for the complainant and the dues of the petitioner had accumulated which were not being paid by the complainant.
According to him, he detained the goods of one truck to seek his dues and gave notice Annexure P-2 to the complainant asking for his dues.
He has further submitted that Annexure P-3 is the notice given to the complainant through counsel in this regard.
According to him, on this occasion, two truck loads were booked by the complainant and out of them, the goods of one truck were delivered and goods of the other were withheld just to enforce the payment of his dues.
According to him, this act does not amount to mis-appropriation .
He has further submitted that since FIR was lodged against the petitioner, he returned the goods of second truck also.
He has further submitted that the petitioner is a poor person and he has been falsely involved in this case.
Learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that the petitioner has committed Crl.
Misc.
not M- 4796 of 2011 ----3-- criminal breach of trust being a carrier and has committed an offence punishable under section 407 IPC.
According to her, the trucks of the petitioner were also found to be having fake number plates etc.and besides under section 407 IPC, case was found under the other provisions of the Indian Penal Code.
According to her, the investigation stands completed, challan filed and charge has been framed against the petitioner.
She has further submitted that the evidence of the prosecution is going on in the case.
Two truck loads of sariya (iron bars ) were entrusted to the petitioner on 27.12.2010 for delivery to two different buyeRs.When the complainant came to knot that the goods of one truck had been delivered to K.
Star, one buyer and the goods of other truck were not delivered, he made enquiry and when he could not find the same, he lodged the report with the police on 04.01.2011.
The petitioner is admittedly a carrier, who was entrusted with goods to be delivered to the consignee.
Admittedly, the petitioner withheld the goods and kept them with him to enforce the payment of his dues.
Whether any amount was due from the complainant to the petitioner is a question of fact, which cannot be decided in these proceedings.
Admittedly the goods were with the petitioner from 27.12.2010 to 04.01.2011.
His action cannot be held justified in any manner.
Crl.
Misc.
not M- 4796 of 2011 ----4-- Therefore, it cannot be said that on the given facts, no prima-facie case under section 407 IPC is made out.
The State claims other offences to have been committed by the petitioner for which challan has already been filed.
In these circumstances, I do not find any reason to quash the FIR in question.
Hence, the petition is dismissed.
January 22, 2013 (VIJENDER SINGH MALIK) dinesh JUDGE