MUTHULAKSHMI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision Case is filed challenging the order passed in Crl.A.No.300 of 2017, by the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Erode, dtd. 27/3/2018, confirming the judgment of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Erode, passed in C.C.No.669 of 2013, dtd. 31/10/2017.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that the revision petitioner/A1 was the wife of the defacto complainant/PW1 and due to disputes, they obtained divorce on 19/3/2010 and she was using the Maruthi Car bearing Registration No.TN 33 AK 3737, even from the period prior to obtain divorce. One Sekar was the car driver. After the grant of divorce on 19/3/2010, when PW1 requested the petitioner/A1 and the said Sekar to handover possession of the car on 1/4/2010, they have stated that the vehicle RC was transferred to the name of the revision petitioner/A1 and on enquiry it was found that the transfer was effected on 1/10/2009 by forging PW1's signature in TO Form. Hence, PW1/de-facto complainant has preferred a complaint under Sec. 156(3) on 19/3/2012 and the same was forwarded to the respondent police for investigation and a case was registered in Crime No.19 of 2012 and on investigation, charge sheet laid against the revision petitioner/A1 and the said Sekar for the offence under Ss. 120(B), 468, 471, 109 of IPC.

(3.) Heard Mr.Selva Kumarasamy for Mr.K.Elangovan, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent police and perused the materials placed on record.