Criminal Revision No. 897 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No. 897 of 2009 Date of Decision:May 30, 2009 Satish Kumar ...........Petitioner Versus State of Haryna and another ..........Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina Present: Mr.Parminder Singh,Advocate for the petitioner. Mrs.Maloo Chahal, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana Mr.Sanjay Mittal,Advocate for respondent No.2 ** Sabina, J. Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging order dated 2.3.2009 whereby application for release of vehicle No. HR-56-5288 Sawaraj Majda on superdari was dismissed by the Special Court, Karnal. Para 5 of the impugned order reads as under:- "From the sequence of events, it becomes ample clear that the present applicant and Smt. Inderjit Kaur are hands in glove with each other and are bent upon to defraud the financier, who invested the huge amount in financing the vehicle. If the superdari of the vehicle is given to the present applicant, there is no assurance that the payment of the remaining installments will be made by him. The only purpose of moving the present Criminal Revision No. 897 of 2009 2 application appears to get the custody of the vehicle by one way or the other and the court cannot be a silent spectator. Smt.Inderjit Kaur though appeared through Sh.Ravinder Singh, Advocate has not opposed the application and did not file any reply. This conduct of Smt.Inderjit Kaur clearly indicates that the present applicant and Inderjit Kaur are conniving with each other with a view of defraud the financier." A perusal of the above paragraph reveals that the Judge, Special Court Karnal has dismissed the application on the ground that the application had been filed with a view to defraud the financier. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it would have been appropriate to issue notice to the financier and thereafter dispose of the application for release of the truck in question on superdari. The truck in question is lying in the Police Malkhana and would loose its utility. In these circumstances, ends of justice would be met if the impugned order is set aside and the trial Court is directed to dispose of the application afresh after issuing notice to the financier. Accordingly, impugned order dated 2.3.2009 is set aside. The Judge, Special Court, Karnal is directed to decide the application for release of the vehicle in question on superdari afresh after issuing notice to the financier. Petition stands disposed of. (Sabina) Judge May 30, 2009 arya