' A complaint is pending in the Court of Magistrate 1st Class/ Assistant Commissioner, Kot Addu.
The petitioner is alleged to have taken away a Truck which had been purchased by the complainant and for which he had made part payment to the petitioner. The trial Court after recording preliminary evidence has summoned the petitioner to stand a charge under section 379, P.P.C. The complaint itself had leveled allegations under sections 420, 406, P.P.C. but the trial Court decided to summon the petitioner for an offence under section 379, P . P . C only.
2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner argues that the allegations against the petitioner are false as there was no writing in existence that the Truck was sold for Rs,40,000 and that a couple of installments were already paid to the petitioner. But in my view this is of no consequence as this objection relates only to the quantum of evidence. On the other hand, if the complainant can produce to show that he was in lawful possession of the Truck and that it was stolen by the petitioner, the petitioner will be guilty of an offence under section 379, P.P.C. Whether the charges can be proved or not A is of course, a matter of evidence and cannot be prejudged at this stage. It is, therefore, not a case of abuse of process of Court. The petition has no merit. It is dismissed. The record of the case may be returned to the Magistrate 1st Class/Assistant Commissioner, Kot Addu for further proceedings in the matter. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.