IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G. JAYACHANDRAN, J.
State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Coimbatore - Appellant
Versus
Saravanan - Respondent
Crl.A. No. 261 of 2013
Decided On : 29-07-2022
Criminal Appeal - Fabrication of fake RC book for stolen vehicle - Sections 465, 466, 468, 471, 473, 474, 420 r/w Section 120B of I.P.C - The court discussed the conspiracy to fabricate fake RC book for a stolen car and the sale of the car to a gullible purchaser. Key legal provisions such as Sections 465, 466, 468, 471, 473, 474, 420 r/w Section 120B of I.P.C were interpreted to establish the guilt of the accused. The court's decision confirmed the order of the Appellate Court, dismissing the Criminal Appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the fabrication of a fake RC book for a stolen car and its sale to a gullible purchaser. The prosecution proved the conspiracy and the accused were convicted, but the Appellate Court reversed the order of conviction.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence did not establish the guilt of one of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, and the theory of conspiracy was not proven. As a result, the Criminal Appeal was dismissed, confirming the order of the Appellate Court.
Issues: The main issue was the establishment of guilt beyond reasonable doubt and the proof of conspiracy in the fabrication of the fake RC book for the stolen car.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the lack of evidence to corroborate and prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, as well as the failure to establish the conspiracy theory.
Final Decision: The Criminal Appeal was dismissed, confirming the order of the Appellate Court.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 378 of Cr.P.C., to set aside the judgment of acquittal of the respondent/accused passed in C.A.No.13 of 2012 [common judgment passed in C.A.Nos.12/2012 & 13 of 2012] dated 04.10.2012 by the Learned Principal Sessions Judge, Thiruppur.)
1. These two appeals are preferred by the State against the order of acquittal rendered by the Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruppur, in a common judgment passed in C.A.No.12 of 2012 & C.A.No.13 of 2012, dated 04.10.2012.
2. The facts of the prosecution is that, one Ramasamy respondent in Crl.A.No.265 of 2013 and his two sons Saravanan/respondent in Crl.A.No.261 of 2013 and Sudhakaran [A3] were running a driving school in the name of “Kavitha Driving School at door No.55/27, Railway Feeder Road, Tiruppur. They conspired to fabricate fake RC book for stolen vehicle and sell it to gullible purchaser. Pursuant to the said conspiracy, the RC book for the Maruti car bearing registration No.TN-37-N-6966 was fabricated. The registration number of the car was fraudulently changed as TN-59-D-3616 and with the fabricated RC book sold the car to one Mathivanan, on 15.02.1997, for a sum of Rs.1,17,500/- The said car with fabricated registration No.TN-59-D-3616 met with an accident on 18.02.2002 on Sangagiri Salem highways near Vaikundam, in which one person died and others sustain injury. When P.W.1 [Fiaz Ahamed], who purchased the said car from one Anil kumar, after accident, when tried to sell the damaged car to third parties, he came to know that, the RC book is a fabricated document, which does not belongs to the car, hence Mr. Anil Kumar gave a complaint to the race course Police Station, Coimbatore. Considering the gravity of the nature, case was transferred to CB CID, Coimbatore for investigation. Further, the Maruti car bearing registration No.TN- 37-L-6766 was purchased by one Kajapathi [P.W.2] in the year 1996 from one Mr.Prasanna for Rs.1,85,000/-. On 08.01.1996, when the car was parked near Suguna Kalyana Mandapam, Coimbatore, it was stolen, hence he gave a complaint to the Peelamedu Police Station, Coimbatore and case was registered in Crime No.1148 of 1996 for offence under Section 379 of I.P.C. From the Insurance Company, he got back the value of the car, after getting Non-traceable Certificate from the police. The RC book of the car was handed over to the Insurance Company at the time of receiving the insurance amount. This fact is corroborated by P.W.4, Anandhan, Zonal Manager of New India Insurance, Coimbatore. The car which came into possession of the accused persons with fabricated RC book bearing Reg.No.TN-59-D-3616 showing one Mr.Pandiyan, as the owner of the car and was sold by the accused to Mathivanan [P.W.6] and Marimuthu [P.W.7] jointly, for a sum of Rs.1,17,000/- through an auto broker Selvaraj [P.W.16]. The stolen car with fabricated RC book bearing Reg.No.TN-59-D-3616, was sold to one Annadurai [P.W.11] and he, in turn, sold it to Anil Kumar and Anil Kumar again sold it to P.W.1 [Fiaz Ahamed], who met with an accident on 18.02.2002, while driving the said car. Thus, through the investigation, trail of the stolen car with fabricated RC book pursuant to the conspiracy between the father and two sons, who were arrayed as accused A1, A2 and A3 came to light and final report was filed against these accused persons for offences under Sections 465, 466, 468, 471, 473, 474, 420 r/w Section 120B of I.P.C.
3. To prove the charges, the prosecution has examined 49 witnesses and marked equal number of exhibits.
4. The trial Court held that the prosecution has proved the conspiracy hatched among the accused persons to fabricate fake RC book for the stolen car and sold it to Mathivanan. Thus, committed offences under Sections 465, 466, 468, 471, 473, 474, 420 r/w Section 120B of I.P.C. The following sentence imposed on them by the trial Court for the respective offences. Section 465 of I.P.C To undergo one year R.I and to pay fine of Rs.500/-
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt and the necessity to establish the conspiracy theory in criminal cases.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the conspiracy and guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of sufficient evidence to prove dishonesty and overestimation of property value in cases of conspiracy to cheat a bank.
Prosecution must prove charges beyond reasonable doubt and follow proper procedures in framing charges; failure to do so may result in acquittal.
The court emphasized the importance of positive evidence, absence of unexplained delays in lodging complaints, and consistency in witness testimonies in reaching a decision.
The court emphasized the importance of proving charges beyond reasonable doubt and considered the repayment of the dues by the accused and the expressed intention of the complainant to withdraw the c....
The judgment establishes that the prosecution's successful proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt, supported by witness testimonies and expert reports, led to the confirmation of the accused's convic....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.