Gauhati High Court
Cholamandalam Investment ... vs The State Of Assam on 7 November, 2023
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010195792023
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./397/2023
CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT FINANCE COMPANY LTD.
THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED PERSON, NAMELY, MR. BHAWWANI
SHANKAR, POSTED AS SENIOR EXECUTIVE, CHOLAMANDLAM
INVESTMENT AND FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED, HAVING ITS BRANCH
OFFICE AT NAVRATAN HATA PURNEA, ABOVE IDBIO BANK, P.S. K HAAT,
P.O. PURNEA, BIHAR, PIN-854301
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP. BY THE ADDL. PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR G SAIKIA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN
ORDER
07.11.2023
Heard Mr. G. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B.
Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.
2. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 18.09.2023; 29.09.2023;
11.10.2023; and 18.10.2023, the learned Addl. P.P. has produced one report,
Page No.# 2/4
received from the concerned IO. I have carefully perused the same, which
indicates that, one Sailendra Singh had purchased the machine i.e. TATA Hitachi
by availing loan from Cholamandalam. But, no legal documents has been
produced before the IO in respect of the said machine by any person and no
MVI report also could be collected as the said machine is not a vehicle in fact.
3. Be it noted here that in this revision petition, under Section 397 read
with Section 401 of the Cr.P.C., the petitioner has put to challenge the
correctness or otherwise of the order dated 30.05.2023, passed by the learned
SDJM [M], Bokakhat in petition No. 438/2023, in connection with Bokakhat PS
Case No. 18/2023.
4. It is to be noted here that vide order dated 30.05.2023, the learned
court below has dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner seeking custody of
the said TATA Hitachi machine, bearing No. NON8764823. Further it is to be
noted here that the aforesaid machine was seized by police in connection with
Bokakhat PS Case No. 18/2023, under Sections 420/406 of the IPC and the said
case was registered on the basis of one FIR lodged by one Mrs. Rijumoni Gogoi,
the Chairperson of Associate Construction Company, a unit of GSR Corporate
Group.
5. Mr. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is the financer of the aforesaid TATA Hitachi machine, which was
purchased by one Sailendra Singh, after taking loan of Rs. 34,94,794/- and the
purchaser has to pay an outstanding due amounting of Rs. 26,53,223/-. But, he
had failed to make payment of the aforesaid amount and as the machine was
seized by police in connection with a case lodged by the informant and the
machine is lying in the campus of Bokakhat PS, a prayer was made before the
learned SDJM [M], Bokakhat, seeking custody of the same, but the learned
Page No.# 3/4
court below has dismissed the same, vide impugned order dated 30.05.2023,
and as the financer of the aforesaid machine the petitioner company is entitled
to get the custody of the machine and therefore, it is contended to allow the
petition.
6. On the other hand, Mr. Sarma, learned Addl. P.P. submits that
ownership of the vehicle had not yet been established and the police has to
verify the same.
7. But, it appears from the report submitted by the police that they
could not verify the ownership of the vehicle and as nobody appears along with
the legal documents of the said machine before the IO.
8. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for both the
parties, I have carefully gone through the petition as well as the documents
placed on record and also perused the impugned order dated 30.05.2023,
passed by the learned SDJM [M], Bokakhat.
9. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is the financer of the seized
machine. Since, the purchaser has failed to make payment of the loan amount
obtained from the petitioner company, the petitioner company is entitled to
reposes the aforesaid machine. And in view of the judgment of Myma Fincop
Limited vs. Rajnish Kumar Tiwari, reported in [2020] 10 SCC 399 and in
that view of the matter, this Court is inclined to allow this petition.
10. It is provided that on furnishing an indemnity bond of Rs.
27,00,000/-, to the satisfaction of the learned SDJM [M] Bokakhat, the seized
Hitachi Machine shall be released in the interim custody of the petitioner,
subject to the condition that the petitioner has to produce the same before the
learned court below as on when directed.
11. In terms of above, this Criminal Revision Petition stands disposed of.
Page No.# 4/4
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
