Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8. In case the accused is convicted for the offence under Section 66 read with Section 192A of the MV Act, relevant orders are passed and in case no offence is made out, finding to that effect is recorded in the STR. Robkars are, thereafter, issued showing that no offence has been made out.

9. Robkar is a Urdu word which essentially means order of the Court. The term, however, is still being used as a matter of practice in common parlance and, hereafter, also referred in the present judgment as "Robkar".

10. Whenever any such Robkars are issued, the original copies are kept in the Court, while a dasti copy is given to the owner/driver of the vehicle who produces it before the concerned Traffic Police Officer to enable him to get the vehicle released.

11. As a matter of practice, the Readers assigned to the Court are given a duty to prepare the Robkars and in the absence of Reader, such Robkars are prepared by Ahlmad or other personnel attached with the Court depending upon their availability.

13. On 19.11.2011, on an oral complaint being made by an Advocate, Ms. Kalpana Gaur, that some Court officials have been removing the offences under Section 66/192A of the MV Act, by issuing forged dasti 'Robkar'; Mr. Dinesh Kumar, M.M.-04(Traffic), South Saket Courts, Delhi, after collecting preliminary information, conducted preliminary inquiry. He asked all officials attached with his Court to inform if they have any knowledge about preparation of such forged dasti Robkars. The replies in writing were given by all officials attached with his Court including the petitioners herein. The learned MM examined the STR, where a total of 292 orders of removal of allegations under Section 66 and 192 of the MV Act were found to have received from the Traffic Inspector of Kalkaji circle. He found that a total of 59 dasti Robkars had, in fact, not been passed by him and were forged. Both the petitioners admitted to have prepared some forged orders and the learned MM in preliminary inquiry found their handwriting to be matching the handwriting in some of the Robkars . The learned MM then recommended that a strict disciplinary action be taken against the petitioners.

Yours faithfully Sunil Kumar Saini Reader Date 21.11 2011"

STATEMENT BY TARUN KUMAR "Dated: 21.11.2011 Sir, I am one of the employee of your office. I was Peon th in 4 Class (Group D) and now Lower Division Clerk. Till today I have not worked as LDC in any office. Traffic Court is my first court, I served. And I have no knowledge about the Robkar. So many times when I used to sit in the Court then Accused and Advocate I was pressurized by them. And now when I newly came then I have been assigned this duty that Robkar is made when It is written in STR Register 66/192A. Thereafter few accused and advocate were pressuring me due to which I was Robkar day by day. Few days back I felt that I have done a mistake and I was not knowing the meaning of Robkar. I agree that due to oversight I have made a mistake but I am telling truth that I do not have any knowledge about the court procedure. I have been serving as LDC for the last one year. Therefore I did not made this mistake intentionally. Sir, I request with my folded hands that my mistake may kindly be excused. I assure you that in future I will rectify my mistake in future. Sir, my service is in your hands. I am really sorry for this. In future if I make little to little mistake then you are liberty to take action against me. But, Sir, please give me one more chance.