The Delhi High Court has upheld the 10-year jail term awarded to a man for trying to kill a call centre cab driver while robbing his vehicle on the ground that he was a "habitual criminal".
"Keeping in view the seriousness of the offence coupled with the fact that dangerous injuries were caused on the person of the injured resulting in hospitalization for a period of 14 days and he is still undergoing treatment coupled with the antecedents of the appellant, no interference is called for even regarding the quantum of sentence," Justice Sunita Gupta said.
The high court also held that the entire evidence has been considered in right perspective by the Additional Sessions Judge who had convicted and sentenced the man and no fault can be found with the findings of the trial court.
"The appellant is a history-sheeter of police station Chhawla. He was found involved in 10 cases of robbery, auto lifting, cheating from areas of Police Stations Najafgarh, Chhawla, Punjabi Bagh, Nihal Vihar, Paschim Vihar, Dwarka, Mayapuri and Hari Nagar. It was submitted that he is desperate and a habitual criminal," the bench said.
The trial court had awarded 10 years rigorous imprisonment to convict Mukesh last year and also imposed a fine of Rs 15,000 on him.
Mukesh was arrested in the case after victim Mithlesh Jha had lodged a complaint with the police alleging that his vehicle was robbed on the intervening night of May 18-19, 2009 by a group of four persons.
He had informed the police that when he was on his way to Gurgaon after dropping the call centre employees in Delhi, one of the accused was walking on the road in drunken condition.
Jha applied the brakes to save the man. Suddenly, three others hiding in the bushes came out and attacked him with a knife and also fired a gun shot. Later, the accused fled from the spot, snatching his vehicle.
During the trial, Mukesh had claimed he has been falsely implicated by the complainant.
While Mukesh was arrested, co-accused Raju, Deepak and Ajay remained untraceble during pendency of the trial and, therefore, they were declared absconders by the court.
