In the absence of any nexus or relationship between the applicant and the complainant, and no evidence of entrustment of property or dishonest intention, the offenses under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code are not made out.

ORDER

1. Though notice is served, none appears for respondent No.2 – original complainant.

2. RULE. Learned APP waives Rule for the respondent State.

3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the matter is taken up for final disposal forthwith.

4. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C.”), the applicant, who is original accused No.2, has prayed to quash and set aside the complaint being FIR No. 11196005220042 of 2022 registered with Chhani Police Station, Vadodara City, for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 427 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

5. At the instance of respondent No.2, FIR came to be filed against the applicant and other two accused, wherein, it is alleged that, accused No.1 Dhaval Shastri by winning trust of the complainant, obtained his car on rent at a rate of Rs.1,000/- per day for 20-25 days and on 26.07.2021, accused No.1 had paid him Rs.10,000/- towards rent via google pay. Upon completion of such period, when the complainant demanded back his car, accused No.1 told that his car will be returned soon along with outstanding rent amount. Thereafter, on 07.08.2021, when the complainant checked GPS location of his car, he came to know that his car was lying at Gothda village, Dist. Vadodara and therefore, upon demanding back his car from accused No.1, he again promised that, his car will be returned in few days. However, accused No.1 did not return his car. Thereafter, after some days, when the complainant again inquired about his car, he came to know that his car was with one Dhaval Jaiswal (accused No.3) of Savli village and when the complainant contacted said Dhaval Jaiswal, he informed that one Mohib Parmar i.e. applicant herein had hypothecated his car with him for an amount of Rs.1,60,000/-. Thereafter, on 23.08.2021, he paid Rs.50,000/- to accused No.3 and promised him to pay the outstanding Rs.1,10,000/- on a later date and got back his car. Upon inspection of his car, the complainant found that his car needs significant maintenance and accused No.3 assured the complainant that he will pay the maintenance of the car and also the outstanding rent amount. In this regard, the complainant made written complaint to Chhani Police Station against accused No.3 for breach of trust and fraud. Hence, accused No.3 returned Rs.50,000/- to the complainant and entered into agreement. Thereby, it is alleged in the complaint that, accused No.1 has defaulted in making the outstanding rent of Rs.31,000/- of his car and in conspiry of accused No.2 i.e. present applicant, hypothecated his car to accused No.3 without knowledge of the complainant and caused damage of Rs.51,446/-. In this regard, FIR came to be filed against three accused persons.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that, the allegations levelled against the applicant are nothing, but an abuse of process of law and no transaction ever took place between the applicant and complainant. He further submitted that, there is no nexus or relationship or rather no property is entrusted to the applicant by the complainant and therefore, the applicant has not committed any offence of criminal breach of trust and fraud.

Further, the applicant has not played any mischief or abetted the offence. Therefore, without any nexus or evidence, no offence of cheating and fraud is being attracted qua the present applicant.

In view of the above contentions, Mr.Patel prays to allow present application and quash the FIR against the applicant, as prayed for, in this application.

7. Learned APP appearing for the respondent-State has opposed the present application and contended that, without any authority or consent, the applicant by hatching criminal conspiracy with accused No.2, hypothecated car of the complainant with accused No.3 and thereby, the applicant has hatched conspiracy with accused No.2 and kept illegal pos