A local court has sentenced two auto drivers to two years rigorous imprisonment each and imposed a a fine of ₹2,000 each for robbing and assaulting a customer after quarrel over auto fare.
As per the complainant, Shah Mohinder Singh, who is a merchant navy serviceman, the convicts— Krishan Kumar of Dhanas and Rama Shankar of Palsora— had stolen ₹50,000 and a gold chain after taking him to a nearby jungle area and beating him there.
On October 7, 2016, around 11:00 pm, the complainant came from Delhi to ISBT, Sector 43, where he had entered into a scuffle with the two convicts and suffered injuries.
A case was registered at the Sector 36 police station. While earlier charges were framed against the two under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) and 341 (wrongful restraint) read with Section 34 (Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the charges were changed to Section 392 (robbery) read with Section 34 under which they have been convicted.
The defence counsel had argued that the prosecution had been unable to prove any theft of articles in the case and none of the witnesses had said that any chain or money had been stolen. The defence had also argued that the complainant did not suffer any external injury, but the court observed that this does not exonerate the accused. “It is the specific version of the complainant that the entire dispute started when he asked the auto driver to switch on the fare meter. The said dispute escalated and as per his version, 7-8 auto drivers took him to the jungle area, beat him and snatched cash and a gold chain from him, meaning that the intention of the accused persons was to get money from the complainant. Once they got successful in getting money, there was no reason to further beat the complainant,” the court observed.
{{/usCountry}}The defence counsel had argued that the prosecution had been unable to prove any theft of articles in the case and none of the witnesses had said that any chain or money had been stolen. The defence had also argued that the complainant did not suffer any external injury, but the court observed that this does not exonerate the accused. “It is the specific version of the complainant that the entire dispute started when he asked the auto driver to switch on the fare meter. The said dispute escalated and as per his version, 7-8 auto drivers took him to the jungle area, beat him and snatched cash and a gold chain from him, meaning that the intention of the accused persons was to get money from the complainant. Once they got successful in getting money, there was no reason to further beat the complainant,” the court observed.
{{/usCountry}}The court also noted that the complainant was immediately taken to the hospital after the incident which also shows the bonafide of the complainant and he had complained of dental pain and pain in the forehead.
The defense had also argued that the stolen items were not recovered by the police, however the court noted that the mere fact that the police failed to recover the said articles does not mean that the said articles were not stolen.
The court also noted that none of the other auto drivers known to the accused were called for questioning to rule out the robbery. “Why would a person who works in merchant navy and who wanted only an auto ride at midnight file a false complaint against the accused persons and that too, over an auto fare of ₹100 only,” the court further observed.