Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

24 . 01 .202 5

1. Heard Mr. Abhishek Vinod Deshmukh, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Sakib Ahmed, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for respondent No. 1/State and Mr. Dhiraj Kumar Wankhede, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No. 2/complainant.

2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayers:

“(i) quash the FIR bearing No. 411 of 2024 registered at P.S. Baloda, District Balodabazar Bhatapara registered against the petitioners; and (ii) quash the order dated 19.06.2024, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, in Case No. 121 of

2024;

(iii) Any other order that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice may kindly be quashed, in the interest of justice.”

3. Brief facts of the case are that on 05.01.2024 at about 6.00 p.m. the co-accused Ashutosh who is ofÏcer of Cholamandalam went to the house of complainant/respondent No. 2 to ascertain the location of vehicle, at that time the complainant was at Ambikapur, therefore, he told his father over mobile phone to inform the location, upon arriving at the specified location the co-accused Ashutosh was informed that he would need to pay Rs. 7.50 lakhs to avoid the seizure of vehicles. The complainant responded that he had already paid Rs. 82,000/- on 02.01.2024, then only Rs. 56,000/- was requested, with the assurance that the remaining amount would be paid within 05 days. Complainant assured that Rs.58,000/- would be paid within 24 hours as he was working in Ambikapur, at that place before seizure Manak Thakur the father of complainant and Golu Jaiswal agreed to pay the above amount, co- accused Ashutosh was found abusing and threatening with complainant on phone accusing him on being orally involved in politics and alleging that as a congress man he betrayed his people by supporting BJP member, Ashutosh also abused and misbehaved with father of complainant. It was communicated by the complainant that vehicles specifically CG-22-P-7350 and CG-22-P-7400 were not in operable condition despite this Ashutosh insisted on forceful seizure later that night at 10.00 p.m., both vehicles were unlawfully seized using a tractor and tow chain crane without any prior notice or panchnama. Thereafter, the respondent No. 2 made a complaint to the Police. The Police then investigated the matter and found that no offence is made out. Being aggrieved therefrom, the respondent No. 2 had filed an application before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, which then without affording an opportunity to the petitioners had directed for registration of offence to P.S. Baloda, District Baloda Bazar and consequently, FIR bearing No. 411 of 2024 has been registered against the petitioners for the offences punishble under Sections 379 and 34 of the IPC.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are ofÏcers of the Finance Company, namely, Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Private Limited. The petitioner No. 1 is Area Manager, petitioner No. 2 is Area Sales Manager, petitioner No. 3 is Area Collection Manager, petitioner No. 4 is Branch Collection Manager and petitioner No. 5 is Collection Team Leader, respectively of Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Private Limited. Pursuant to the registration of FIR, the petitioners applied for Anticipatory Bail before the learned Session Court, which was rejected by the learned Session Court vide order dated 02.07.2024. Thereafter, the petitioners filed Anticipatory Bail before this Court, which was granted vide orders dated 10.07.2024 and 24.07.2024 in MCRCA No. 753 of 2024 and MCRCA No. 818 of 2024 respectively.

5. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondent No. 2 on 18.04.2019 and 17.12.2020 availed financial services for purchase of trucks bearing registration numbers CG 22 B

7350 and CG 22 P 7400 for an amount of Rs. 32,75,152/- and 231,09,321/- and for