1. This is a petition under section 561-A of Code of Criminal Procedure for quashment of order of Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Anantnag in a Revision Petition titled "Ghulam Hassan Gorsi v. Ghulam Hassan Bhat" dated 20th May 2009, whereby Revisional Court set aside order of Learned Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class) Anantnag taking cognizance of offence punishable under section 379 Ranbir Penal Code in a complaint titled "Ghulam Hassan Bhat v. Ghulam. Hassan Gorsi", directing issuance of process against the respondent/ accused and also temporarily releasing seized property (Tractor) on superdnama in favour of petitioner/complainant.

2. The facts necessary for disposal of the present petition may be summarized, in the first instance:-

The petitioner/complainant on 18th of March 2009 filed a complaint in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Anantnag, alleging therein that his Tractor bearing Registration No.JK02A/7760 was intercepted by the respondent/accused at Batingoo on Bijbehara- Anantnag road and forcibly taken away from the possession of petitioner/complainants son Shri Javid Ahmad Bhat, who at the time of occurrence, was driving the vehicle in question. The petitioner/complainant claimed to have purchased the vehicle in question from M/s Valley Tractors Awantipora, through authorized agents of the Dealer and paid an amount of Rs.3,35,000/- together with an amount of Rs. 10,000/- for the documents to the Vendor. The petitioner/complainant denied to have sold/transferred the vehicle in question to any person, including the respondent/accused. It was further alleged that the respondent/accused assaulted the petitioner/ complainant and resorted to use of criminal force.

3. The Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, on receipt of the complaint and after recording statement of the petitioner/complainant and one Shri Mohammad Khalil Dar, a witness accompanying the complainant, decided to defer issuance of process against the respondent/accused and instead decided to get the veracity of the complaint ascertained through an inquiry. Accordingly, in terms of section 202 Code of Criminal Procedure an inquiry was directed in the matter by Station House Officer Police Station Anantnag.

4. The Inquiry Officer made a threadbare inquiry into the matter, recorded statements of the complainant and other witnesses as also Dealer, who had sold the vehicle mentioned in the complaint. The Inquiry Officer also seized the vehicle in question, allegedly taken away by the respondent/accused. The Inquiry Officer found that the vehicle (Tractor) was originally purchased by the respondent/accused from M/s Valley Tractors, Awantipora, and thereafter sold to the petitioner/ complainant for an amount of Rs.3,65,000/-, about two years prior to the date complaint was filed. It was also found that at the time of sale transaction, the respondent/ accused had agreed to liquidate the loan, raised by him at the time of purchase of vehicle against its hypothecation, from J&K Bank Limited Branch Seer Hamdan. It was found that the respondent/accused did not abide by the terms and conditions of sale transaction and avoided to repay the loan raised from the aforementioned bank at the time of purchase of vehicle (Tractor in question). The Inquiry Officer discovered that the respondent/ accused accompanied by his accomplices, on the day of occurrence, took control of the Vehicle at Batingoo, while it was being taken by the petitioner/complainants son for repairs to a local workshop and pretending that the vehicle (Tractor) in question was being seized by the bank officials took it to the Bank premises, wherefrom the vehicle was seized by the Inquiry Officer. The Inquiry officer came to know from the bank officials that though the Tractor was initially hypothecated to the said bank, yet all the outstanding amount had been cleared and the bank had no more any claim on the said vehicle. The Dealer (Valley Tractors), on being approached by the Inquiry officer, disclosed t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document