‘Violation of mandatory requirement renders conviction illegal’: Telangana HC acquits man after 7 years for driving without insurance
The lower court had sentenced the man in Telangana’s Sangareddy to undergo simple imprisonment for three days, and imposed a fine of Rs 1,000.
3 min read
The Telangana High Court Friday quashed criminal proceedings against the aged parents and married sister of a man accused of dowry harassment and cheating. (File/ Telangana High Court website)The Telangana High Court Friday acquitted a man who was convicted by a trial court in 2019 for driving a motorcycle without insurance and causing public nuisance, citing a failure to follow proper legal procedure.
Justice Juvvadi Sridevi set aside the trial court’s judgment from January 9, 2019, acquitted the petitioner of all charges, and directed that any fine amount that was paid by him be refunded.
The lower court had sentenced the man to undergo simple imprisonment for a day for the offence under Section 3(3) of the Town Nuisance Act. The lower court also sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for two days, and imposed a fine of Rs 1,000 for the offence under Section 196 of the Motor Vehicles Act, based on what it recorded as an admission of guilt.
The case dates back to December 26, 2018, in the Sangareddy town, where the police alleged that the petitioner was found driving a vehicle on the wrong side of the road and without valid insurance.
The petitioner had contended that he never pleaded guilty, and that the trial court “without posing any questions, upon its own recording, convicted and sentenced him.” The petitioner contended, “The learned Magistrate failed to record the plea of guilty as nearly as possible in the words used by the accused, as required under Section 252 CrPC (Code of Criminal Procedure).”
In the order, Telangana High Court said, “It is mandatory for a Magistrate to record the plea of guilty as nearly as possible in the words used by the petitioner-accused… Violation of such mandatory requirement renders the conviction as illegal”.
“This Court is of the firm opinion that the learned trial Court has failed to follow the procedure contemplated under Section 252 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and also failed to satisfy himself that the allegations in the charge sheet do constitute an offence or not, which amounts to gross illegality and irregularity,” the high court noted.
While scrutinising the evidence presented in the chargesheet, the high court observed that apart from photographs of a parked vehicle, there was insufficient “incriminating material” to prove that the petitioner was actually “driving” the vehicle on the wrong side of the road.
The high court also found that the vehicle had a “valid and effective insurance” policy in force during the alleged period of the offence.
You May Like
