Madras High Court
The State Bank Of Bikaner And ... vs The Sub-Inspector Of Police on 21 April, 2021
Crl.R.C.No.858 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 21.04.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN
Crl.R.C.No.858 of 2015
The State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur,
represented by its Branch Manager & Authorized Officer,
No.AC 56, New No.16,5th Avenue,
Anna Nagar Branch,
Chennai 600 040. ... Petitioner/Owner of the Car
Vs.
1.The Sub-Inspector of Police,
K-10, Koyambedu Police Station,
Koyembedu, Chennai.
(Crime No.1083 of 2014) ... 1st Respondent/Complainant
2.T.Darshan ... 2nd Respondent/Proposed party
[R.2 is impleaded as per order of this
Court dated 21.04.2021 made in
M.P.No.1 of 2015 in Crl.R.C.No.858 of
2015]
PRAYER: This Criminal Revision Petition has been filed under
Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C, to set aside the order
passed in Crl.M.P.No.853 of 2015 in K-10, P.S.Crime No.1083 of
2014, by the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai,
dated 10.06.2015.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.858 of 2015
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Sathish Rajan
for M/s.N.Kishore Kumar
For R1 : Mr.R.Surya Prakash
Government Advocate
JUDGMENT
The revision petitioner, who is the State Bank of Bikaner
and Jaipur, has filed this Criminal Revision Case praying to set aside
the order dated 10.06.2015, passed by the learned V Metropolitan
Magistrate, Chennai, in Crl.M.P.No.853 of 2015.
2.Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/Bank
and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the first
respondent and also perused the materials placed on record.
3.The revision petitioner/Bank is the defacto complainant. By
producing the fake documents, the accused had obtained a Car loan
from the revision petitioner/Bank and had purchased a Car on
monthly installments and he had failed to repay the same in spite of
several requests made by the revision petitioner/Bank. Therefore,
on 28.07.2014, the revision petitioner/Bank had filed a complaint
before K-4, Anna Nagar Police Station and based upon the said
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.858 of 2015
complaint, a case was registered in Crime No.1627 of 2014, for the
offence under Sections 406, 420, 468 and 471 of IPC. During the
investigation, it came to light that the accused was trying to sell the
Car by producing forged documents. Therefore, the proposed
purchaser has given a complaint to the respondent police and based
upon the said complaint, a case in Crime No.1083 of 2014 was
registered by the respondent police for the offence under Sections
420, 467, 468, 471 and 472 of IPC and the accused was arrested
and the subject Car was also seized by the respondent police.
4(a).On a perusal of records, it is seen that since the loan
amount is more than Rs.10,00,000/-, the revision petitioner/Bank
has filed an application in O.A.No.254 of 2014, against the accused,
before the Debts Recovery Tribunal - I, Chennai, for recovery of
outstanding amount of Rs.10,01,659/- with subsequent interest and
cost and the Debts Recovery Tribunal - I, Chennai, by an order
dated 27.02.2015, has allowed the above said application with
liberty to the revision petitioner/Bank to sell the Car.
4(b).Initially interim custody of the Car was given by the
learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, to the revision
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.858 of 2015
petitioner/defacto complainant in the petition filed in
Crl.M.P.No.2839 of 2014, on 28.01.2015 and hence, revision
petitioner/Bank has filed a petition in Crl.M.P.No.853 of 2015 for
modification of the order dated 28.01.2015, passed in
Crl.M.P.No.2893 of 2014, by the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate,
Egmore, Chennai, and the said petition was dismissed by an order
dated 10.06.2015. As against the order of dismissal, the revision
petitioner/Bank has preferred the present Criminal Revision Case
before this Court.
5.No doubt true that the Debts Recovery Tribunal - I, at
Chennai, has granted permission to the revision petitioner/Bank on
the ground that the loan was obtained by the accused by producing
fake documents. The main case is pending before the learned V
Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, in respect of Crime
No.1083 of 2014 (K-10 Police Station). Since the trial is yet to be
commenced and the Car has to be marked as material object, this
Court finds that the interest of justice will be met by issuing the
following directions:
The learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, is
hereby directed to complete the enquiry and mark the Car as
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.858 of 2015
necessary material object and thereafter, grant permission to the
revision petitioner/Bank to take the Car since the Car has been kept
idle for more number of years and the respondent police is directed
to co-operate for early disposal of the case.
6.With the above directions, this Criminal Revision Case is
disposed of.
21.04.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
dua
To
1.The V Metropolitan Magistrate,
Egmore, Chennai.
2. The Sub-Inspector of Police,
K-10, Koyambedu Police Station,
Koyembedu, Chennai.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.858 of 2015
RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN. J.
dua
Crl.R.C.No.858 of 2015
21.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
