Delhi District Court
State vs Aabida Hasmi on 2 April, 2025
TC 70041/2024
STATE Vs. Aabida Hasmi & Anr.
(Sadar Bazar Traffic Circle)
IN THE COURT OF GOWRI REGHUNATH : JMFC-10
CENTRAL DISTRICT : TIS HAZARI COURT : DELHI
TC 70041/2024
STATE Vs. Aabida Hasmi & Anr.
(Sadar Bazar Traffic Circle)
1. Case No. of the case : 70041/2024
2. The date of offence : 12.12.2024
3. The name of the accused : (1) Shoaib
persons s/o Sh. Naushad
(2) Aabida Hasmi
w/o Shoaib
4. The offence complained : u/s 185, 39/192
of M.V. Act
5. The plea of the accused persons : Not guilty
6. Date of institution of the case : 13.12.2024
7. Date of reserving the : 24.03.2025
order
8. The date of order : 02.04.2025
9. The final order : (1) Accused Aabida
convicted u/s
39/192 M.V. Act
(2) Accused Shoaib
convicted u/s
39/192 & u/s 185
M. V. Act
Page No. 1 of 12
TC 70041/2024
STATE Vs. Aabida Hasmi & Anr.
(Sadar Bazar Traffic Circle)
JUDGMENT
1. Vide this judgment, this court shall dispose of traffic challans bearing no DL90560241212192717 & DL90560241212190856 issued against the accused Aabida Hasmi and accused Shoaib respectively on 12.12.2024 under Section 185, 39/192 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as M.V. Act).
2. In brief, the case of the prosecution is that on 12.12.2024 at about 07:00 p.m. at Barf Khana Chowk, within jurisdiction of circle Sadar Bazar, accused Shoaib was found plying a scooter bearing engine no. JK15ED4129419 in drunken condition having 225mg/100ml of alcohol, and committed RC violation. Further, the case against accused Aabida Hasmi is that being the owner of the said vehicle, she permitted accused Shoaib to drive the vehicle and committed RC violation. Upon issuance of challans for the said offences, the vehicle of the accused was impounded on the spot.
3. The challan was taken up before this court on 13.12.2024 upon appearance of the accused persons. Cognizance was taken of the offences stated in the challan. As the said offences are bailable, the accused persons were admitted to bail. As per Section 274 BNSS, notices were framed on accused Shoaib under Sections 185, 39/192 MV Act and against accused Aabida Hasmi under Section 39/192 M.V. Act to which the accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. Since both accused chose to contest the challan, an application for release of the vehicle was filed on the same date.
Page No. 2 of 12 TC 70041/2024STATE Vs. Aabida Hasmi & Anr.
(Sadar Bazar Traffic Circle) Vide order dated 16.12.2024, the said vehicle was released on superdari to the registered owner.
Prosecution Evidence
5. In support of its case, the prosecution examined two witnesses, namely SI Naresh Pal (PW-1) who is the challaning officer and HC Munesh (PW-2).
6. During examination in chief, both witnesses deposed that 12.12.2024, they were posted at Sadar Bazar Circle, Delhi. At about 6:30 -7:00 PM, when they were on duty at Barf khana Chowk they saw two persons coming on a scooter who seemed to be drunk. PW-1 stopped them and asked for the papers of the said vehicle. The name of the driver was revealed as Shoaib. Upon stopping him, the accused was found to be smelling of alcohol. When the accused was checked with an alcometer the quantity came to be 225 mg/100ml. The accused also did not have the registration certificate of the vehicle. He was challaned by challan Ex. PW-1/A (colly). PW-1 also impounded the said vehicle and deposited the same in the traffic circle pit. As per the documents, the aforesaid vehicle was registered in the name of Aabida Hasmi. Both witnesses correctly identified the accused Shoaib.
7. During cross-examination, both witnesses deposed that the vehicle did not have any number plate affixed on it, and for the same reason the challan mentions the offence of 'RC violation'. The witnesses admitted that the accused had showed one slip on his mobile phone in which the name of the owner was mentioned as 'Aabida Hasmi'. Both witnesses stated they Page No. 3 of 12 TC 70041/2024 STATE Vs. Aabida Hasmi & Anr.
(Sadar Bazar Traffic Circle) can neither confirm nor deny the suggestion that a new vehicle is exempt from affixing number plate till a high security registration plate (HSRP) is issued for the vehicle. PW-2 stated that he did not remember whether a temporary number was affixed to the offending vehicle, and stated that PW-1 may have written the temporary registration number of the offending vehicle in the challan.
8. While both witnesses stated they do not recall when the alcometer was last tested for fitment, they denied the suggestion that the alcometer was not functioning properly. The witnesses further stated that they did not take photographs of the readings obtained by the alcometer as the readings were generated in the challan. They also denied the suggestion that the readings were not shown to the accused. Both witnesses further stated that no medical examination as conducted of the accused as there was no reason to conduct the same.
Statement of Accused
9. Vide order dated 31.01.2025 prosecution evidence was closed, thereafter statement of accused persons was recorded u/s 351 BNSS. In the said statements both the accused denied all incriminating material put in evidence against them. Accused Aabida admitted that the vehicle was registered in her name, however she stated that as the vehicle was newly purchased the registration certificate in respect of the same was not yet issued. Accused Shoaib stated that he was not drunk, and he had merely consumed gutka. He stated that the vehicle was purchased two days before the challan was issued and therefore the vehicle only had a temporary number plate. He further stated that he did not Page No. 4 of 12 TC 70041/2024 STATE Vs. Aabida Hasmi & Anr.
(Sadar Bazar Traffic Circle) have the registration certificate of the vehicle as it was newly purchased, however he showed them the purchase receipt of the said vehicle. The accused persons opted not to lead DE.
Final Arguments
10. During final arguments, Ld. APP for State argued that testimony of both prosecution witnesses along with the proof of challan sufficiently establishes the case of the prosecution. It was submitted that the accused Shoaib committed the offence of drunk driving and the same is proved by the oral testimony of witnesses and the result of the breath analaysis test Ex. PW-1/A (colly). It was further submitted that both accused Shoaib and Aabida committed the offence of RC violation as the vehicle in question did not have a high security number plate, and merely had a paper number plate bearing the temporary registration number. Accordingly, it was submitted that the offences under Section 185, 66(1)/192 M. V. Act are proved beyond reasonable doubt.
11. Per contra, ld. Counsel for the accused contended that since it was a newly purchased vehicle it did not have a number plate and registration certificate. However, the accused was in possession of a receipt of purchase of the said vehicle which he showed at the time of issuance of the challan, however the same was not considered by the challaning officials before impounding the said vehicle. It was further argued that the accused was not drunk and the alcometer was faulty and the readings obtained by the same could not be relied upon.
Page No. 5 of 12 TC 70041/2024STATE Vs. Aabida Hasmi & Anr.
(Sadar Bazar Traffic Circle) Analysis of Evidence
12. It is a settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that the burden of proof rests the prosecution to prove the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
Drunk driving
13. To prove the offence under Section 185 M.V. Act the prosecution must establish that firstly the accused driving or attempting to drive a motor vehicle, secondly while driving/attempting to drive the motor vehicle, the accused had in his blood, alcohol exceeding 30 mg. per 100 ml blood, thirdly such quantity of alcohol was detected in a test conducted by a breath analyser or any other laboratory test.
14. As per the oral evidence of both prosecution witnesses, when accused Shoaib was stopped he was smelling of alcohol. Upon examining him with an alcometer, the quantity came to be 225 mg/100ml. The same is supported by Ex. PW1/A (Colly) which contains the result of the breath analysis test and shows the test result to be 225mg/100ml.
15. The defence taken by the accused is that the he was not drunk, and had merely consumed gutka. Further, it is the case of the accused that the alcometer was faulty and the readings obtained were incorrect. However, no evidence has been led by the accused in support of the same.
16. Perusal of the alcometer slip Ex. PW1/A(Colly) indicates that the alcometer was calibrated until 27/12/2024, and air blank test value was obtained as 0mg/100ml. Moreover, the mere fact Page No. 6 of 12 TC 70041/2024 STATE Vs. Aabida Hasmi & Anr.
(Sadar Bazar Traffic Circle) that the accused did not take photographs of the readings obtained by the alcometer would not render the alcometer reading inadmissible, as the readings are recorded in the report of breath analysis Ex. PW1/A (Colly). Therefore, there is no reason to believe that the alcometer was malfunctioning.
17. The oral evidence led by the witnesses is sufficiently corroborated by the result of the breath analysis. Accordingly, this court finds that the prosecution has successfully proved that the accused Shoaib was drunk driving the vehicle with 225 mg alcohol per 100 ml blood.
RC violation
18. Before delving into the exercise of appreciating the evidence in respect of the offence of RC violation, it would be appropriate to revisit the relevant legal provisions of the M.V. Act pertaining to the same.
Section 39. Necessity of registration-- No person shall drive any motor vehicle and no owner of a motor vehicle shall cause or permit the vehicle to be driven in any public place or in any other place unless the vehicle is registered in accordance with this Chapter and the certificate of registration of the vehicle has not been suspended or cancelled and the vehicle carries a registration mark displayed in the prescribed manner.
Section 43. Temporary registration.-- Notwithstanding anything contained in section 40, the owner of a motor vehicle may apply to any registering authority or other Page No. 7 of 12 TC 70041/2024 STATE Vs. Aabida Hasmi & Anr.
(Sadar Bazar Traffic Circle) authority as may be prescribed by the State Government to have the motor vehicle temporarily registered and such authority shall issue a temporary certificate of registration and temporary registration mark in accordance with such rules as may be made by the Central Government.
19. The form and manner of display of registration marks on motor vehicles is prescribed in Rule 50 of Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 relevant excerpts of the same are reproduced herein:
Rule 50. Form and manner of display of registration marks on the motor vehicles.
(1) On or after commencement of this rule, the registration mark referred to in sub-section (6) of section 41 shall be displayed both at the front and at the rear of all motor vehicles clearly and legibly in the form of security license plate of the following specifications....
(2) In the case of motor cycles the registration mark in the front shall be displayed parallel to the handle bar on any part of the vehicle including mudguard facing the front instead of, on a plate in line with the axis of the vehicle....
20. The punishment for using a vehicle without registration is prescribed in Section 192 MV Act:
Section 192 Using vehicle without registration--
(1)Whoever drives a motor vehicle or causes or allows a Page No. 8 of 12 TC 70041/2024 STATE Vs. Aabida Hasmi & Anr.
(Sadar Bazar Traffic Circle) motor vehicle to be used in contravention of the provisions of section 39 shall be punishable for the first offence with a fine which may extend to five thousand rupees but shall not be less than two thousand rupees for a second or subsequent offence with imprisonment which may extend to one year or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees but shall not be less than five thousand rupees or with both:
Provided that the court may, for reasons to be recorded, impose a lesser punishment.
21. Combined reading of the aforesaid provisions indicates that the key ingredients of the offence of RC violation under Section 39/192 MV Act are as follows
i) Driving or permitting a person to drive a motor vehicle
ii) Such motor vehicle is either not registered, or the certificate of registration is not valid, or
iii) The motor vehicle does not carry a registration mark displayed on the vehicle in the form of a security license plate
22. Therefore, Section 39/192 M.V. Act not only penalizes non-registration of vehicles, but also penalizes an omission to display the registration number in the form of a security license plate as prescribed by Rule 50, CMVR. The policy behind the same is to ensure security license plates are affixed on all vehicles to ensure detection of traffic violations and commission of offences using the vehicle.
Page No. 9 of 12 TC 70041/2024STATE Vs. Aabida Hasmi & Anr.
(Sadar Bazar Traffic Circle)
23. During evidence, both prosecution witnesses deposed that the accused did not have a registration certificate in respect of the vehicle, and the vehicle did not have any number plate affixed on it. In his testimony, PW-2 stated that he does not remember whether a temporary number plate was affixed on the vehicle. He further stated that PW-1 may have written the temporary registration number of the vehicle in the challan.
24. Perusal of the challan EX. PW1/A colly reveals that in the remarks column, the challaning officer has recorded the following observation as the violation of RC: "Applied for Engine No. JKSED4129419 blue colour scooty". Perusal of the challan further reveals that vehicle no. is mentioned as DL5STC0441.
25. The testimony of both witnesses establishes that the vehicle was being driven without a regular number plate. During their cross-examination both witnesses were confronted with the suggestion that a vehicle is exempt from affixing a number plate till a high security number plate is issued for the said vehicle. Both witnesses stated they can neither confirm nor deny the same. The same implies an admission on part of the accused that the vehicle did not have a high security number plate as per the specifications in Rule 50 CMVR. Even during the course of final arguments, Ld. Counsel for the accused admitted that the vehicle did not have a number plate.
26. At this juncture, it would be appropriate to consider the defence taken by the accused persons with regard to the same. It is the case of the accused that as the vehicle was newly Page No. 10 of 12 TC 70041/2024 STATE Vs. Aabida Hasmi & Anr.
(Sadar Bazar Traffic Circle) purchased, the registration certificate was yet to be issued, and that the vehicle was exempt from affixing a high security number plate for the same reason.
27. In support of the same, the accused produced the insurance policy in respect of the vehicle during the course of trial. As per the policy, the date of registration of the vehicle is 11.12.2024, i.e. one day before issuance of the present challans. While the same explains the absence of the registration certificate with the accused, it cannot be accepted as a valid defence for not having affixed a security license plate. Even if the accused were issued a temporary registration number as per Section 43 MV Act, the registration mark of the same ought to have been displayed in the form of a security license plate as prescribed by Rule 50, CMVR.
28. In the present case, even if it is assumed that the vehicle number mentioned on the challan as DL5STC0441 is the temporary registration number issued to the accused, it is proved that the same was not displayed in the form of a security license plate.
29. Since Section 39 and Section 192 M.V. Act apply to the one who drives the vehicle as well as the person who permits the vehicle to be driven, it imposes liability on the driver as well as the owner of the vehicle. Accordingly, this court finds that the prosecution has successfully proved that accused Shoaib drove the vehicle without a security license plate, and accused Aabida being the owner of the vehicle permitted accused Shoaib to drive the vehicle without a security license plate, and thereby Page No. 11 of 12 TC 70041/2024 STATE Vs. Aabida Hasmi & Anr.
(Sadar Bazar Traffic Circle) both committed the offence of RC violation under Section 39/192 MV Act.
Conclusion
30. From the above-mentioned discussion, this Court is of the view that the prosecution has successfully established the guilt of the accused Aabida under Section 39/192 M.V. Act and accused Shoaib under Section 39/192, 185 MV Act. Accordingly, the accused Aabida stands convicted for the offence under Section 39/192 M.V. Act and accused Shoaib stands convicted for the offences under Section 39/192 and Section 185 M. V. Act Announced in open court today i.e. 02.04.2025.
Digitally signed by GOWRI GOWRI REGHUNATH
REGHUNATH Date: 2025.04.02
15:10:29 +0530
(GOWRI REGHUNATH)
JMFC-10/Central/THC
02.04.2025
It is certified that this judgment contains 12 pages and each page bears my signatures. Digitally signed by GOWRI GOWRI REGHUNATH REGHUNATH Date:
2025.04.02 15:10:33 +0530 (GOWRI REGHUNATH) JMFC-10/Central/THC 02.04.2025 Page No. 12 of 12