[mmxylorider]

My 2 c worth. As a responsible citizen (and victim) you should do what the law requires you to do. The system will worry about what and hows on the culprit. Humane and charitable organizations are there for this reason only.

There is no inadvertency here. 3 intoxicated people on a powerbike is reckless endangerment. Economic and other conditions take a backseat.

[Venkat_Figo]

As human beings we need to empathize, but just replace your car with a pedestrian or replace your car with a bike. The damage caused could have been way worse.

Driving under the influence of alcohol/drugs is a serious crime, their financial status cannot be a reason for sympathy. Many poor people give their food if you ask them, that's because they know what hunger is, as they go days without food, but these nut cases do not value life. Let law take its own course.

In certain cases punishment is necessary to instill discipline. Not that it is guaranteed, but we cannot let it go.

[hema4saran]

Please don't bring in the financial status of their family into the picture for these kind of incidents sir. When they were able to buy a 200cc motorcycle, feed petrol to the bike and to them (Alcohol and Drugs) they are not ordinary peoples. You are not doing any good to the society by asking them to go Scott free. Let them face the criminal charges and get punished.

If you still want to give them a chance, one thing you can do is if you are influential and somewhat powerful in society, get them into a rehab center and keep monitoring them. It will be really difficult for them to come out of their addiction and their lifestyle.

[TwistedFaith]

Possibly dumb thing to ask - but what is the procedure in case you DO chose to proceed with a complaint?

The reason I am asking is that I have been involved in various accidents at this point where I was stopped and the offender was not so well off or else was part of some union or the other (taxi/auto).

In all cases what I found was that the police had no interest in taking a written complaint and any effort to persue the matter would result in my getting into trouble with the police... In two cases the police threatened to impound my vehicle saying that as per the rules they have to impound all the vehicles involved.

I suspect they were not lying about the rule because in one case at least the inspector was sympathetic to my case as the cab driver was being loud and abusive even in the station - but in the end his logic was, your vehicle is 15 lakh, his is 3 lakh - once impounded it will take months to get them back - he will not lose much but you will so pay him and settle the matter. In that instance (after talking to a lawyer friend who is more aware of how to deal with the police) I paid the cab driver 5000 Rs for the privilege of being hit by him while I was waiting at a red light becase he misjudged how close he was to me.

[low_rider]

Similar incident, but with a Bollywood twist:

My colleague's i20 was hit head-on in Gurgaon near Ambience Mall, by two youth on a motorcycle who were driving on wrong side against the flow of traffic and trying to make a shortcut towards the highway. Both were without the helmet. They banged against the car and broke the windshield and their heads and legs. The police came and took them to hospital.

Now the fun part: The police asks the i20 owner to pay for their medical expenses stating that “Galti to insan se hi hoti hai” (means, a human is bound to make mistakes, and you should pay for that, although it is no fault of yours”.
Further, the police threatened to impound the car and resolved to make the owner’s life hell with a police case, else they settle the matter with youth’s parents after offering them money. This was the official stand of the police.

Now the twist: After medical examination, hospital authorities found both the youth to be severally underage---at best 14 years. Now the police says that you can go, and my colleague said that now we want an FIR. It was some sight to look at the policemen’s faces, who knew that the tables have turned. Anyways, we let them live in peace and vice-versa, but the crux of the matter is that mightier wins in India.

You can be traumatised by the legal system for a road accident, but if you pull up a gun and shoot all the counter-parties, then there is nothing the so-called police and legal system can do (pun-intended).

[saleem_k]

I don't see much dilemma in this situation my friend. This is the harsh reality of our country that we have serious traffic and law and order issues. If these are not dealt with proactively and sternly these may come back to haunt you.

In Hyderabad, I have seen quite some accidents caused by the rich, famous and most of the times, the not-so-famous but young and ready to splurge 'IT' crowd. Innocent people have lost their lives (including the drivers themselves in most cases) when drunk youngsters driving/racing their own or others cars have rammed into people standing at a signal or on a footpath. This is a serious problem and if such things are let go, you may actually be letting a killer loose and one day he might take someone else's life when driving a four-wheeler and I'm sure you won't feel good about it.

So please go ahead and press charges and take the legal course because this person is probably better off in a jail for sometime than being free and probably ending up dead or killing others by his driving. You were affected financially, but if you let him go, in the future someone may pay with their life.

[JohnyBoy]

If you let him go off,
A. He may think he can get away with anything and become more careless and bad. [Bad]
B. Or he may thank you for giving a second chance and becomes a good boy. [Good]

If you go legal way and push for punishment,
C. He may think about his actions, realsie it was bad, turn a new leaf and become a good person. [Good]
D. He may become bitter, may get close to hardcore criminals in jail and becomes an anti-social guy. [Bad]

Now, there can be another situation. You initiate legal action and case drags on for sometime. Court dismisses the case (for whatever reason- lack of evidence, non-cooperation from police, you withdraw because of pressure etc).
E. In this case, the boy will become bitter for wasting his time and effort. [Bad].

All these possibilities were suggested and discussed. But everyone missed one key point. It is not 1 guy, there are 3 guys. All 3 of them are not going to jail. Only the owner of the bike will be booked. Remote chance of the rider and owner (if they are different). Definitely not all 3 are getting punished. Now only guy in jail (or stuck in case process) and 2 others outside. This can create a lot of rift between them. And their families. Blaming each other, accusing one for spoiling the other etc.
F. Chance of all 3 of them getting frustrated and becoming revengeful and finally anti-social is very high. [Bad]

[selfdrive]

It would be interesting to hear from the OP what did he end up doing next. Not doing anything is also a conscious decision to leave the incident and move on.

Originally Posted by Ragavsr

If the road is to be used by both expensive and utilitarian vehicles, it's unfair that cheap vehicles have to bear the liability of expensive repairs much higher than the cost of the vehicles itself.

I was trying to point out with an example that we should not change our attitude to people because of their financial status.
Regardless of which vehicle caused the damage, our attitude and expectations should be the same. Whether the perpetrator can afford it or not.

I hope that helps explain

[Par_neon]

I am a firm believer in the below quote from a Batman movie
"Crime cannot be tolerated. Criminals thrive on the indulgence of society's understanding"

And hence IMO If you let them off the hook without any sort of punishment, the chance that they will learn something from the incidence is almost nil. This will just become an one more addition to their bragging list.

There has to be at-least some sort of punishment to drive home the message.

[Brishti]

Forced community service but no jail time.

[Anand3553]

I think you are thinking too much and creating a dilemma yourself. As law abiding citizen, all we are allowed to do is to let the law take its course. Neither you nor us have the right to decide if they need to be punished/what punishment is apt. The law will decide that.

I think you should simply do what you are supposed to do legally and let the law take its course.

[mustang 99]

Originally Posted by autobahnjpr

Hi,

Should I take a hard view and let them suffer for their misdeed and spoil their life with a police case which will make it difficult for them to get a job, a passport and stop many avenues in life or should I take a lenient view considering that there is no injury and there is only damage to the car and let them leave for their karma to act out itself. I am in a dilemma. What would you do if you were in this situation?

My two cents after spending my whole life in NCR region, my advice to you will be take money for the car repairs and let them go.
Indian legal system is really bad, it wont be a smooth affair for you at all. The case will drag on for years forcing you to appear before the court , wasting your entire day every-time there is a summon. Going to jail will only make them hardened criminals. There is no point in making enmity with such people for few bucks.

[shrjun]

This is not an ethical dilemma ,it's a legal one and should be treated as such.There are laws regarding drunk and irresponsible driving.

[hiren.sharma]

I think the choice should be clear here. It's good to know that we still have people like you on the planet driving vehicles, who care more about the rider than their ride.

IMHSO (Spiritual Opinion), God is making you the Karma Messenger and through you, he's just pushing out the punishment for them.

In Delhi NCR, we see lots of bikes with 3 ppl on them, riding without a helmet or even without proper DL since they are underage. Just letting them go because of their financial status or condition is a straight blow to our (already declining) justice setup.

And there is a possibility that it wasn't their first time of crashing into another vehicle and there is no guarantee that they won't do it again in future.

I understand that the decision is difficult for you but think of this situation from an absolute point of view (ignoring their condition/status) if you'd let them go, anyone, who crashed into a stationary vehicle under the influence of alcohol? Had this been a case of carelessness/distraction (without alcohol), you could have given it a second thought but with Alcohol, it's a straight NO.

[sagaranjos]

Where's the dilemma?
Let law take its course. As someone mentioned, let him sell off the bike of he is that poor.