Youth fined Rs50K for fleeing with impounded car

Tribune News Service
Chandigarh, September 18

Harpreet Singh Sethi has little reason to say cheers. Caught by the police for stealing his own car after it was “impounded” at a drunken driving naka three years ago, the 28-year-old computer science graduate has been asked to cough up Rs 50,000 as fine.

The court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Abhishek Phutela held Sethi guilty under Section 379 (theft) of the IPC.

After his arrest, Sethi was lodged in jail for a day (August 7 to August 8, 2016).

While pronouncing the quantum of the sentence, the court ordered: “To undergo imprisonment for the period already undergone by the convict and to pay fine of Rs 50,000.” In default of payment of the fine, the convict will undergo simple imprisonment for a month.

According to the prosecution, Head Constable Kamal Singh stated in a complaint that on August 7, 2016, he was on duty at the Sector 16/17 light point where a naka was laid to check drunken driving. Around 12.15 am, an Innova car (CH 01 AH 0378), coming from the Matka Chowk side, was stopped. On checking with an alcometer, it was found that its driver had consumed alcohol to the extent of 73.06 mg. Car driver Harpreet Singh Sethi was asked to step out and the vehicle was taken into possession and parked on the roadside.

While cops were busy in their duty, the driver fled with the vehicle using a duplicate key. A message was flashed on the wireless and the offending driver was contacted on his mobile number, who said he would return after 10-15 minutes, but he did not return for 30 minutes.

After sometime, policemen saw the Innova parked at 50 metres from the naka.

Sethi was then booked under Sections 379 and 422 of the IPC at the Sector 17 police station.

In the court, the convict pleaded that he had a degree in computer science, his father has died and he was the sole breadwinner of the family, which included his old mother. Besides, he had never been involved in any offence and, therefore, a lenient view may kindly be taken.

The prosecution contended that the convict be sentenced with the punishment so provided for the offences in the statute.