Honble SINGH, J.–Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for non- petitioner No.2.

(2). This petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. is directed against the order dated 22.10.96 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division) & Judicial Magistrate, Padampur. By the said order the learned Judicial Magistrate, Padampur rejected the application filed by the petitioner for giving the jeep in his supardagi and maintained his earlier order dated 29.11.95 whereby the supardagi of the jeep was entrusted to non-petitioner No.2.

(3). The facts of the case so far as they are relevant for the disposal of this petition may be summarised as below:

(4). According to allegations made by Mohan Singh (petitioner), he is the registered owner of Jeep No. PUW 1642. He agreed to sell the jeep to Kulwant Singh (non-petitioner No.2) for a sum of Rs. 77,000/-. The agreement was executed between the parties and in part performance of the contract of sale, Kulwant Singh (non- petitioner No.2) paid a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the petitioner and obtained the possession of the jeep. The remaining amount of Rs.27,000/- was to be paid by the non-petitioner No.2 on or before 15.10.95. it was also agreed between the parties that on payment of full purchase-price. the petitioner would take steps for transfer of the title to the jeep to the non-petitioner No.2 by change of entries in the registration-certificate and other related documents.

(5). It is alleged by the petitioner that non-petitioner No.2 did not pay the remaining price i.e., Rs. 27,000/- as was agreed to between the parties. On 16.10.95, the petitioner sent a notice to the non-petitioner No.2. In spite of that notice, the non-petitioner No.2 did not pay the amount which was due and no steps were taken by him to get the jeep transferred to him. The petitioner thereafter lodged the first- information-report (No.169/95) at Police Station Ghumarwali, alleging therein the commission of offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and, on the basis of that report, the Station House Officer of the Police Station Ghumarwali commenced investigation. During the investigation of that case, the jeep No. PUW 1642 was recovered by the Police Officer.

(6). Applications were filed before the learned Judl. Magistrate under Section 451 of the Criminal Procedure Code for giving the jeep in supardagi. On 29.11.95, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Padampur made an order to the effect that the jeep be given to Kulwant Singh (non-petitioner No.2) on supardagi subject to his furnishing supardagi nama of Rs. 1,00,000/-. It was also directed that the non-petitioner No.2 shall not dispose of the jeep and shall keep it in the same condition in which it was at that time and that he would produce the same as and when ordered by the Court. The order dated 29.11.95 was presumably passed in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 451 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The investigation on that day was in progress.

(7). The petitioner filed a revision petition against the order dated 29.11.95. The revision petition No.10/96 was disposed of by the learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge No.1, Sriganganagar vide order dated 06.02.96. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Sriganganagar dismissed the revision petition and upheld the order dated 29.11.95 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Padampur.

(8). After the completion of the investigation, the Police submitted the final report under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The final report was sub- mitted after the disposal of the revision petition No. 10/96 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.1 by his order dated 06.02.96.

(9).The petitioner moved an application before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Padampur and prayed therein that the jeep be given to him in supardagi as investigation had been completed and final report had been submitted by the police.

(10). The learned Judicial Magistrate, aft

Click Here to Read the rest of this document