A. GANGADHARA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision is filed by the Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, Ramachandrapuram, to set aside the order passed by the Munsif-Magistrate, Sangareddy, in Crl. M. P. No. 156 of 1981.

( 2 ) THE second respondent, Messrs South Eastern Roadways, Hyderabad, were entrusted to transport 28 (7 + 5 + 11 + 5) seamless steel pipers, 2 cooling coils, 5 laddles and 4 cable drums and deliver them to the petitioners Company at Ramachandrapuram. The case of the petitioner is that, instead of delivering them, the second respondent retained them with him with an ulterior motive, and thus committed criminal breach of trust. Consequently, report was given at the police station, Ramachandrapuram, and a case was registered under Section 407 of the Indian Penal Code, against the 2nd respondent.

( 3 ) THE petitioner submits that the abovementioned items are necessary for use in the day-to-day manufacture of the company. The company cannot get these materials in the open market in this country. Many of them are imported and scarce items. They are immediately required for manufacture of components for the Thermal Power Stations. Due to heavy demand of power and expansion of power stations by the Central and various State Government, these components are required to improve the power generation in the country. It is further submitted that the absence of raw materials will result in retrenchment of the employees, and will cause heavy loss to the public sector industry amounting to national loss. It is stated that there is no dispute about the ownership and the entrustment of the above materials to the 2nd respondent and he is withholding them on the ground that he had to get some excess amount, more than the agreed amount. It is also submitted that this property is not required for identification. Therefore, the petition was filed by the petitioner to permit them to utilise the above material even before the trial of the case.

( 4 ) THE 2nd respondent filed a counter stating that as per the agreement the petitioner had to deposit certain amounts in the Bank and it was only after depositing the amounts, the petitioner could taken the delivery and he had failed to deposit the amount in the Bank. It was further stated that the charge-sheet is not filed so far and under Section 451 Cr. P. C. , only interim custody could be given and the goods could not be finally disposed of.

( 5 ) THE learned Magistrate in his order dated 3/04/1981 held that if the property was kept unutilised during the pendency of the trial it would definitely result in loss to the Company as well as to the Nation. He also held that he was satisfied that the property is subject to natural decay which would ultimately result in loss to the company as well as to the Nation. But he found that under Section 451 Cr. P. C. , he could dispose of the proper after recording some evidence during the pendency of the trial and since in this case no charge-sheet has been filed, the petition is premature. In the result he closed the petition without pronouncing any final ode with an observation that the petitioner should wait till the stage of recording of evidence is reached.

( 6 ) IN this revision it is submitted by the learned counsel of the petitioner that it is a scarce material which has been imported by the petitioner-company for utilising in power generation and if it is not immediately used, besides going rusty, it will also cause great loss to the company as well as to the Nation, for, the petitioner-company manufactures power generation sets in the country. It was further submitted that there is no dispute with regard to the ownership or identity of property, that the second respondent is only claiming a lien for his transportation charges, that the Magistrate him self found that if the properly is kept unutilised it would definitely cause loss to the company as well as to the Nation, and that under Section 457 Cr. P. C. , the Magistrate should have delivered the go

Click Here to Read the rest of this document