Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Delhi District Court

Gurmeet Singh vs The State on 14 July, 2010

                     IN THE COURT OF MANOJ JAIN
                        ASJ/SPCIAL JUDGE (NDPS)
                 OUTER DISTRICT:ROHIIN COURTS:DELHI

Criminal Appeal No. 18/2010

GURMEET SINGH 
                                               
                                              ......................APPELLANT          
           
                                      VS. 
THE STATE 

                                               ....................RESPONDENT

Date of institution of Appeal:  07.07.2010
Date when arguments concluded : 14.07.2010
Date when Judgment pronounced : 14.07.2010

Present:­           Sh. Vichitra Kumar, Ld. counsel for appellant/convict 

                    with convict. 

                    Ms. Purnima Gupta, Ld. APP for the State. 


                                  ORAL JUDGMENT

1 Appellant/convict Gurmeet Singh was driving bus no. DL1P A 5934 on 28.04.10. He was coming from Kamal T­Point Side and was to go towards Karol Bagh. As per the challaning officer, the driver of the bus overtook one another bus in running condition and thereby violated the directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court which amounted to the violation of condition of permit. Accordingly, appellant was challaned.

Gurmeet Singh Vs. The State                                                       page  1
                                                                                           of 5
                                                                                             
 2          Appellant had desired to contest the matter.  He was held guilty by 

Ld. Trial Court for commission of offence u/s 66(1)/192(A) of Motor Vehicles Act and has been fined Rs. 2,000/­.

3 Appellant has taken exception to such order.

4 Trial Court Record was summoned.

5 I have heard Sh. Vichitra Kumar, Ld. counsel for appellant and Ld. APP and carefully perused the entire material available on record. 6 Case is of overtaking another running bus. Route of bus is very vital and crucial in the present context. It is apparent from the perusal of judicial record that offending bus was coming from Kamal T­Point and was on New Rohtak Road. It was supposed to take a right turn from the red light point situated opposite Libery Cinema. Naturally, if any bus has to take a right turn, it is required to change lane and in order take proper turn, it has to come on the extreme right so that there is no obstruction to the vehicles which are otherwise required to go straight. As per the evidence of Challaning Officer, the accused had changed the lane from a distance of 250 meters before the crossing. Challaning Officer also asserted that such turn should have been taken from a distance of 100 meters and not from a distance of 250 meters. There is no rule or law prescribing distance in this regard. Drivers are required to change lane Gurmeet Singh Vs. The State page 2 of 5 well before the turn in such a manner so that there is least inconvenience to the other users of the road. In the case in hand, it becomes very much evident that since the bus was supposed to take a right turn, it changed its lane and came towards the extreme right side of its carriage way and even if in the process, he had crossed some another bus, which otherwise was going straight, it cannot be said to be a case of overtaking at all. Things might have been different, had after crossing such bus, the appellant had again come on to the middle lane. Then it would have been a case of clear overtaking. Neither he actually intended to overtake any bus nor he did that. His act of simply coming towards the extreme right cannot tantamount to indicate his intention of overtaking. In the present case, whereas the appellant struck to right lane and took right turn from the liberty crossing. His such act cannot be said to be in violation of the directions given by Hon'ble Apex Court or amounting to any violation of condition of permit.

7 Resultantly, the appeal is allowed and appellant stands acquitted of charge u/s 66(1)/192A of M.V. Act. Needless to say that he would be entitled to refund of fine amount.

8 Trial Court Record along with copy of Judgment be sent to Ld. Trial Court.

Gurmeet Singh Vs. The State                                                    page  3
                                                                                        of 5
                                                                                          
 9         A copy of order be given to appellant free of cost. 



10        Appeal file be consigned to record room. 

Announced in the open court 
Today i.e. on 14th July, 2010                   (MANOJ JAIN)
                                          ASJ/Special Judge (NDPS)
                                       Outer District:Rohini Courts:Delhi




Gurmeet Singh Vs. The State                                           page  4
                                                                               of 5