- This topic has 0 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 1 year, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
UOn Friday night, I was at a pub named Qubaaa in Visakhapatnam. While intoxicated, I requested a pack of cigarettes. An employee displayed a UPI QR code for payment, but I noticed it was his personal QR code. Upon realizing this, I gave him an assertive look (without verbal confrontation), and he promptly switched to showing the organization’s QR code.
I then asked him to open the cigarette pack in a firm tone, though not abusive or directed personally. The environment was loud due to background music. However, the staff member seemed to misconstrue my tone as personal abuse.
In response, he manhandled me by grabbing my collar, forcibly ejecting me from the pub, and physically assaulting me—an act seemingly driven by personal ego rather than legitimate grounds. This resulted in physical injuries.
The staff later claimed that I was personally abusive, citing CCTV footage as evidence. However, the footage does not clearly establish whom I was allegedly abusing. Even if there were verbal abuse, I did not threaten anyone physically or act in a manner that justified violence.
Key points to highlight:
1. No Evidence of Misconduct:
No evidence of misbehavior with women.
No breach of pub regulations.
No direct or physical threat made to anyone in the premises.
2. Questionable Justification:
The staff’s claim of personal abuse remains unsubstantiated by the CCTV footage.
Even if verbal abuse occurred, it does not justify manhandling or physical assault by the staff in a professional establishment.
This raises critical concerns regarding consumer protection and public safety. A venue operating under professional obligations should not resort to violence, especially when there is no clear or immediate threat. The staff’s actions appear to be a case of personal ego overshadowing professional conduct, leading to unnecessary physical harm to a consumer.
I am seeking legal representation to address this incident and hold the establishment accountable for the physical assault and its failure to uphold consumer safety standards.
-
