Details - Dhemaji

More documents

Recommendations

Info

7) There was no insurance. 8) There was over loading of passengers. Head constable Sri Jugal Hazarika registered a Silapathar PS Non FIR case No 134/2011 u/s 177/182/192/192(A)/190(2)/196/194 of the MV Act and made a prayer that the accused persons namely Hema Chutia who is the owner of the vehicle and Suriya Gogoi who is the driver of the vehicle be prosecuted u/s 177/182/192/192(A)/190(2)/196/194 of the MV Act. The case was received and registered as MV case No 441/2011 and transferred to this Court for disposal. Cognizance was taken under Sections177/182/192/192(A)/190(2)/196/194 of the MV Act and the accused persons were summoned to face trial in this case. Accordingly the accused persons appeared in Court and they were allowed to go on personal bail. Copies of the relevant documents were furnished to them and the substance of the offences u/s 177/182/192/192(A)/190(2)/196/194 MV Act were explained to them under the provisions of Sec 207 of Cr.P.C to which the accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Accordingly the Court proceeded with the trial. The prosecution examined two witnesses in this case. The 313 statements of the two accused persons under Cr PC were recorded. The defence adduced no evidence on their part and their case was of complete denial. POINTS FOR DETERMINATION 1. Whether the accused persons parked their vehicle in the no parking zone and thus committed an offence under section 177 of the MV Act? 2. Whether the accused persons, on being asked by the police official, failed to produce any driving license and thus committed an offence under section 182 of the MV Act?
3. Whether the accused persons by driving an over loaded bus and without any pollution certificate committed an offence under section 190(2) of the MV Act? 4. Whether the accused persons, on not being able to produce the registration certificate of the vehicle, as asked for by the police official, committed an offence under section 192 of the MV Act? 5. Whether the accused persons, on not being able to produce any road permit, as asked for by the police official, committed an offence under section 192A of the MV Act? 6. Whether the accused persons had carried excess passengers in their vehicle and thus committed an offence under section 194 of the MV Act? 7. Whether the accused persons were driving the vehicle without insurance and thus committed an offence under section 196 of the MV Act? Discussions and reasons there of: In this case two witnesses were examined. PW2 is the police personal who had submitted the offence report in this case. In his evidence he stated that on 6.2.2011 he was posted as Havildar in Silapathar thana and he was checking the Silapathar Jonai Road Tiniali. PW1 Pushpa Narah was with him. He had checked AS 22-3366 bus. While checking the driver was unable to produce documents relating to the vehicle. Surjya Gogoi was the driver of the vehicle. When PW2 enquired the driver of the vehicle said that the vehicle had no documents. He also did not have his driving license. PW2 came to know that the driver of the vehicle was Hema Chutia. Further PW2 stated that on previous occasion also he had asked the driver to produce documents but he had ignored him. On that day the bus was overloaded with passengers. When PW2 asked the driver to show him the documents he told him that ‘I will not show any documents, do whatever you like’. On being asked as to why he was wearing chappals while driving, Surjya replied that as it was summer time he was feeling hot. In his cross examination PW2 stated that the RC book shown to him in court has the
Page 1: IN THE COURT OF MUNSIFF NO 2/JUDICI
Page 5 and 6: also stated that as far as he knew

Details - Dhemaji

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?