S. B. SAKRIKAR. J.

( 1 ) THIS order shall, govern the disposal of all the aforesaid three Criminal Revisions based on similar facts involving common question of law.

( 2 ) THE aforesaid Criminal Revision Nos. 184/96, 185/96 and 186/96 are directed against the order dated 30th Nov. , 1995, passed by Additional Sessions Judge. Mandleshwar in Criminal Revision Nos. 145/95, 147/95 and 146/95 respectively, thereby reversing the order dated 26th April, 1995, passed by Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Maheshwar in Case No. 0/ 94, refusing to register the complaint against the applicants under section 203, Cr. P. C, by the non-applicant Maheshchandra.

( 3 ) FACTS of the aforesaid criminal revisions stated in brief are as under:i. Cr1 Revision No. 184/96:the non-applicant Maheshchandra filed the complaint against the applicant in the Court of Judicial Magistrate. First Class, Maheshwar on the averment that he entered into an agreement of hire purchase with the complainant regarding bus bearing Registration No. MBO-967 in July, 1991 and the applicant obtained Rs. 1,25,000/- from the non-applicant. It was agreed between the parties at the applicant shall pay Rs. 2,00,000/- to the non-applicant in 36 equal instalments of Rs: 7,500/ -. It is also stated in the complaint that the applicant obtained second finance of Rs. 1,40,000/- dishonestly without paying the first finance to the non-applicant - and fraudulently entered into an agreement concealing the first one. On the aforesaid facts, the non-applicant prayed for the action to be taken against the applicants under sections 120-B. 406,420 and 422 I. P. C. On filing the aforesaid complaint, the statement of non-applicant was recorded under section 200, Cr. P. C. and in support of his statement, statement of one Mohd. Nasim was also recorded. The report from Police Maheshwar was also requisitioned. Learned Magistrate on considering the evidence recorded in the case and perusing the documents dismissed the complaint under section 203, Cr. P. C. holding that the matter purely relates to the Civil Transaction. Aggrieved, the non-applicant has filed revision application in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Mandleshwar. By the impugned order, learned ASJ allowed the revision application holding that there is sufficient material on record for taking cognizance against the applicant under sections 406, 420, I. P. C. Aggrieved, the applicant has filed this revision petition. ii. Criminal Revision No. 185/ 96: The non-applicant filed the complaint against the applicants in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Maheshwar on the averment that he entered into an agreement of hire purchase with the complainant regarding the bus beartlig Registration No. MBG 8282 on 29th March. 1991 and the applicants obtained Rs. 1,60,000/- from the complainant/ non-applicant. It was agreed between the parties that the applicants shall pay the aforesaid amount in monthly instalment of Rs. 4,400/ -. The applicants got the vehicle repaired on 13-10-1992 and entered into an additional agreement of Rs. 2,00,000/ -. The applicants without making the payment to the non-applicant sold the vehicle putting the non- applicant to a great loss. On the aforesaid facts, the non-applicant prayed for the action to be taken against the applicants under sectionsl20-B, 406, 420 and 422, I. P. C. On filing the aforesaid complaint, the statement of non-applicant was recorded under section 200, Cr. P. C. and in support of his statement, the statement of one Mohd. Nasim was also recorded. The report from Police Maheshwar was also requisitioned. Learned Magistrate on considering the evidence recorded in the case and perusing the documents dismissed the complaint under section 203, Cr. P. C. holding that the matter purely relates to the civil transaction. Aggrieved, the non-applicant has filed, revision application in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Mandleshwar. By the impugned order, learned ASJ allowed the revision ap

Click Here to Read the rest of this document