Delhi District Court
State vs . : Manoj on 12 April, 2016
IN THE COURT OF SH. APOORV SARVARIA, MM (TRAFFIC), NORTH
WEST DISTRICT, ROHINI COURTS, DELHI
State Vs. : Manoj
Challan No. :883376
Vehicle No. :DL 2W 1611
U/S :66/192A,184,39/192,3/181
Circle :BWC
JUDGMENT
Challan No. :883376
Date of Institution : 05.10.2012
Date of Commission of offence : 04.10.2012
Name and address of accused :Manoj Kumar S/o Sh.
Govind Singh, R/o Block
BH East, Shalimar Bagh,
Delhi.
Offence complained of : 66.1/192A,184,39/192, 3/181 of
MV Act
Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
Final order :Acquitted
Date of announcing the final order :12.04.2016
State vs. Manoj
Challan No. 883376
Vehicle No.DL 2W 1611
Circle BWC
Page 1 of 5
Brief statement of reasons for the decision
1.The case of the prosecution is that on 04.10.2012 at 9:30 am at near Sector18 modh, RohiniBadli Road, the accused while driving vehicle no. DL 2W 1611 coming from Haider Pur side and going towards Badli Railway Station was found plying the vehicle dangerously in zig zag manner causing danger to himself and other road users and thereby he committed an offence U/s 184 of Motor Vehicles Act. It is further the case that on above said time, place and date the accused was found carrying 17 passengers in the vehicle and he thereby committed offence u/s 39/192 of Motor Vehicles Act by having excess passengers. It is also the case of prosecution that on the above said date, time and place the accused was found plying the above said vehicle without allotted route thereby he committed offence u/s 66/192 A of Motor Vehicles Act. The accused was also found without driving license and he therefore committed offence u/s 3/181 of Motor Vehicles Act.
2.The notice of accusation was framed against the accused on 10.05.2013 to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3.The prosecution has examined three witnesses. PW1 SI Narayan Dutt was examined in chief and thereafter PW1 was cross examined. PW2 Ct. Sanjay was examined and cross examined. PW3 Ct. Lokender Singh was examined and State vs. Manoj Challan No. 883376 Vehicle No.DL 2W 1611 Circle BWC Page 2 of 5 thereafter crossexamined.
4.Examination u/s 313 of Cr PC was conducted on 24.06.2013 and all incriminating evidence was put to the accused. The accused stated that on the given date and time, the vehicle had no passengers at all. He admitted that he was found at Sector 18 Mor, Rohini. He admitted that he was not on allotted route but stated that he was there just to get the CNG filled at Badli CNG Pump. He admitted that he did not have driving license on the spot but he produced the same before the court. He denied that he was driving dangerously.
5. Accused has not lead any evidence in his defence.
6.This Court has heard Ld. APP for the State as well as the Ld. Advocate for the accused and perused the record.
7.As far as the accusation for offence u/s 3/181 of Motor Vehicles Act is concerned, on 24.06.2013, Ld. Predecessor had observed that the driving license of the accused was produced in original and the challan against the owner was disposed of as no offence was made out. Since the driving license was produced, the offence u/s 3/181 of Motor Vehicles Act cannot be said to have been made out.
8.In so far as the violation of RC condition on the ground of carrying excess passengers and permit violation on the ground that the vehicle was not driven on State vs. Manoj Challan No. 883376 Vehicle No.DL 2W 1611 Circle BWC Page 3 of 5 the allotted route, the admitted case is that the accused was found at Sector 18 mor, which is not coming on the allotted route. The dispute is that accused is denying that he was carrying any passengers and had only went there for filling up of CNG. PW1 SI Narayan Dutt has deposed that he found 17 passengers sitting in the vehicle but in his crossexamination he deposed that he had not taken signature from any of the passengers sitting in the vehicle. PW2 also stated during cross examination that he did not take signatures from any of the passengers. PW3 Ct. Lokender Singh deposed in his crossexamination that the passengers had refused to sign on the challan. From the above testimony of the prosecution witnesses, it is clear that prosecution has not been able to conclusively prove that there were 17 passengers or in fact any passenger found in the vehicle when the same was stopped. Therefore, the accused deserves the benefit of doubt and cannot be said to have been carrying passengers at the given time and date. Hence, accused cannot be found guilty of carrying excess passengers. Since it cannot be proved that the accused was carrying passengers, the prosecution has failed to prove that the accused had committed route violation. As far as the allegations that the accused was driving dangerously, none of the prosecution witnesses have deposed anything in respect of the same. Therefore, in the view of the above analysis, the accused cannot be held to have committed any of the offence against which accusations have been made.
State vs. Manoj Challan No. 883376 Vehicle No.DL 2W 1611 Circle BWC Page 4 of 5
9.In view of the above observations, the court finds that the prosecution has failed to prove its case and no offence is made out. Therefore, accused is acquitted. Bail bonds stand cancelled. Surety is discharged. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced in the open Court on 12.04.2016.
(APOORV SARVARIA) MM(Traffic) NorthWest Rohini Courts, Delhi 12.04.2016 State vs. Manoj Challan No. 883376 Vehicle No.DL 2W 1611 Circle BWC Page 5 of 5