A teenager who pleaded guilty in June to the aggravated assault of a Surrey taxi driver will have his sentencing hearing later this month.

Under provisions of the Youth Criminal Justice Act, the attacker cannot be named.

His co-accused – who was left to face trial for the aggravated assault, robbery and assault with a weapon of Ashfaq Jathole, a driver for Whalley Taxi – had the charges dismissed by Judge James Wingham last month.

In his ruling, Wingham said Crown counsel had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed any of the offences or did anything to aid or abet the attacker.

Early on the morning of Jan. 19, 2008, Jathole picked up two teens at an undisclosed address in Surrey.

One male got into the front passenger seat, the other sat in the back of the cab.

Jathole drove the two to an apartment complex near 136 Street and was told by the front-seat passenger to pull into the parking lot, at which point the passenger pulled a knife on him and demanded money.

Jathole complied but the young man wanted more. When he didn't get it, the teen stabbed the driver.

As he got out of the taxi and attempted to escape, Jathole was stabbed three more times and punched in the mouth.

The driver finally managed to get away and call for help on his cab radio as the two males fled.

Jathole suffered stab wounds to his chest, abdomen and lower back.

The front-seat passenger pleaded guilty to aggravated assault at the beginning of his trial in June.

The Crown pursued charges against the back-seat passenger, arguing that he had aided and abetted the attacker.

But Wingham found inconsistencies in Jathole's testimony, including his mistaken identification of the accused as the front-seat passenger and the fact that he could not describe the person who grabbed him and punched him.

The judge also noted Jathole was in a "state of anxiety" at the time.

"I am of the view that it would be unsafe to convict the accused based on that evidence," Wingham said in his written ruling.

"As I have concluded that I cannot rely on the evidence of Mr. Jathole as to the involvement of the person in the rear seat of his cab, I find that I have a reasonable doubt as to the participation of [the accused] in the robbery of and the assault of Mr. Jathole."

Wingham concluded that the Crown "failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused actually committed any of the offences charged or that he did anything to aid or abet [the attacker] in the commission of those offences."

rstarr@surreyleader.com