1. Unauthorized and authorized procurement and supply of railway e-tickets through multiple user IDs — Criminal proceedings under Section 143, Railways Act, 1989. (Para 2 , 3 , 5 , 6 )
Back
Next 
2025 Supreme(SC) 77
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
DIPANKAR DATTA, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, JJ.
Inspector, Railway Protection Force, Kottayam – Appellant
Versus
Mathew K. Cherian and Another – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 4169 of 2024 [Arising Out of SLP (Criminal) No. 2408 of 2017]
With
J. Ramesh – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos. 139-140 of 2025 [Arising Out of SLP (Criminal) Nos. 9225-9226/2022]
Decided On : 09-01-2025
Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Namit Saxena, AOR Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. A. Raghunath, AOR Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Mr. Alim Anvar, Adv. Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, AOR Mrs. Anu K Joy, Adv. Mr. Santhosh K, Adv.
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Namit Saxena, AOR Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. A. Raghunath, AOR Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Mr. Alim Anvar, Adv. Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, AOR Mrs. Anu K Joy, Adv. Mr. Santhosh K, Adv.
IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Unauthorised business of procuring and supplying railway e-tickets – Section 143 of Railways Act, 1989, has been enacted to tackle a social crime – Section 143 penalises actions of only unauthorised agents and not unauthorised actions of authorised agents.
(2) No court can refuse to enforce a provision on sole basis of provision predating any subsequent development regarding ticketing process.
(3) Power of quashing is not unfettered or unlimited – Judicial discretion has to be exercised judiciously.
Headnote:
(A) Railways Act, 1989 – Section 143 – Unauthorised business of procuring and supplying railway e-tickets – High Court, vide impugned order, quashed criminal proceedings – Section 143 criminalises unauthorised procurement and supply, irrespective of mode of procurement and supply – Mere fact of system of e-reservation and e-tickets being introduced after enactment of the Act does not render provision in Section 143 toothless to combat illegal sale of e-tickets – Section 143 makes no distinction between physical and online sale of tickets – Mischief that provision seeks to remedy is that there should not be illegal and unauthorised procurement and sale of tickets, whatever be the mode – physical or online – Electronic and internet services have not only become indispensable but offer significant advantages to public – Having regard to comprehensive phraseology employed in Section 143, net of its coverage is wide enough to encompass regulation of conduct of ticketing agents and to protect public from unscrupulous elements trying to defraud them by sale of valueless tickets – Section 143, a penal provision, has been enacted to tackle a social crime – Indian Railways is a keystone of our country’s infrastructure – Any effort to disrupt integrity and stability of ticketing system has to be stopped on its tracks – Section 143 does not criminalise creating multiple user IDs – Penal provisions have to be read strictly and narrowly as a general rule – Section 143, by being completely silent on creation of multiple user IDs, penalises actions of only unauthorised agents and not unauthorised actions of authorised agents – Criminal proceedings partly restored. (Paras 27, 28, 29, 31, 36 and 40)
(B) Interpretation of Statutes – Statutory interpretation has to follow certain principles which have been formulated through legal precedents – No court can refuse to enforce a provision on sole basis of provision predating any subsequent development regarding ticketing process – If it can be demonstrated that a statutory provision is broad enough to envelop subsequent developments, even if developments were not envisioned by Legislature, the provision would stay operational – If language of particular statute under consideration is clear and unambiguous, it is not for courts to add to or delete any words from statute in guise of ascertaining what could have been Legislative intent. (Paras 21 and 26)
(C) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 [Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – Section 528] – Quashing of criminal proceeding – Quashing of a criminal proceeding can take place if FIR does not reveal a crime or if fact situation be such that continuance of criminal proceedings would result in abuse of process causing injustice to accused – Power of quashing is not unfettered or unlimited – Judicial discretion has to be exercised judiciously. (Para 33)
Facts of the case:
Common question of law touching interpretation of Section 143 of Railways Act, 1989 is involved in these appeals by special leave.
Findings of Court:
Lead appeal deserves to be allowed and consequently, the criminal proceedings against Mathew need to be restored. It is ordered accordingly.
Result : Appeals allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Whether Section 143 applies to e-ticketing and whether authorized agents can be prosecuted under the section for unauthorized actions using multiple user IDs. (Para 7 , 8 )
3. Section 143's broad language encompasses e-tickets; statutory provisions apply to subsequent technological developments if the words are capable of comprehending them. (Para 11 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 )
4. Section 143 penalizes unauthorized persons procuring tickets regardless of mode; it does not apply to authorized agents, regardless of their specific conduct in procurement. (Para 17 , 27 , 35 , 36 )
5. Criminal proceedings restored against the unauthorized person and quashed against the authorized agent. (Para 38 , 39 , 40 )
6. Does Section 143 of the Railways Act, 1989 apply to the unauthorized sale of e-tickets?
Yes. The court held that the broad language of Section 143, which prohibits unauthorized procurement and supply of tickets, encompasses e-tickets. Statutory provisions apply to new technological developments if the language is wide enough to contain them, regardless of whether the legislature envisioned them at the time of enactment. (Para 21 , 22 , 27 , 28 , 29 )
7. Can an authorized railway agent be prosecuted under Section 143 for unauthorized actions such as creating multiple user IDs?
No. Section 143 specifically applies to persons who are not railway servants or authorized agents. It does not criminalize the specific manner in which an authorized agent operates; any breach of contractual terms or conditions by an authorized agent must be remedied through civil action, not criminal proceedings under this section. (Para 17 , 35 , 36 )
8. How should courts interpret statutes when new technological situations arise that were not contemplated during the law's enactment?
If the statutory language is broad enough to envelop subsequent developments, the provision remains operational. In a modern progressive society, courts should presume the legislature intended words to take in new facts and situations if the phraseology is capable of comprehending them. (Para 21 , 22 )
9. Does procuring tickets in the name of genuine passengers via the internet constitute procuring and supplying under Section 143?
Yes. Taking active steps to acquire and provide tickets to third parties without being a railway servant or authorized agent attracts the expression procure and supply, even if the tickets are procured in the names of the passengers rather than the agent's own name. (Para 30 )
JUDGMENT :
DIPANKAR DATTA J.
INTRODUCTION
1. Common question of law touching interpretation of Section 143 of the Railways Act, 19891 [the Act] is involved in these appeals by special leave; hence, we propose to decide the same by this common judgment.
2. In the first of the two sets of appeals2 [the lead appeal] the judgment and order3 [in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 1991/2016 dated 22.09.2016] of the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulum4 [Kerala High Court] is assailed whereby criminal proceedings under Section 143 of the Act launched against the first respondent-Mathew K. Cheriian5 [Mathew] was quashed.
3. In the connected appeals, the appellant - J. Ramesh6 [Ramesh] has assailed the judgment and order7 [Crl. O.P. No. 18701/2020, 18703/2020 and Crl. MP. Nos. 7328/2020, 7329/2020] of the High Court of Judicature at Madras8 [Madras High Court] refusing to quash the criminal proceedings launched against Ramesh under Section 143 of the Act.
FACTUAL MATRIX
4. The factual scenario of the two sets of appeals are not too complicated. The facts which are germane are noted as a precursor to our discussion.
5. The prosecution case in the lead appeal is that on 11.03.2016, on reliable information being disclosed to the Inspector, Railway Protection Force9 [RPF] that unauthorised business of procuring and supplying railway e-tickets was being carried out in the office of Mathew, Crime Case No. 524/2016 under Section 143 of the Act was registered and a search conducted thereat. During the search and seizure operation, one employee named Joby Jose of Kosamattam Finance, a non-banking finance company (of which Mathew happened to be the managing director) was arrested and 17 pieces of evidence were seized. In his confessional statement, Joby Jose stated he was working under the supervision of Mathew. On the basis of this statement, Mathew was made co-accused in Crime Case No. 524/2016. He was accused of creating fraudulent user IDs with the Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation10 [IRCTC] web portal to procure and peddle railway tickets for profit, without being an agent authorised to procure and supply railway tickets and, therefore, operating an unauthorised business for procurement and supply of railway tickets. Aggrieved, Mathew moved the Kerala High Court under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, 197311 [Cr.P.C.] seeking quashing of the proceedings. The Kerala High Court, vide the impugned order, quashed the criminal proceedings emanating from Crime Case No. 524/2016. Dissatisfied thereby, the Inspector, RPF is in appeal.
6. The connected appeals arise out of Case Crime No. 3116/2019 and Case Crime No. 600/2020. The case of the prosecution is that Ramesh and his son are the owners of “Big Top Travels” which is an authorised agent for railway e-tickets. On 05.12.2019, Case Crime No. 3116/2019 came to be registered against Ramesh under Section 143 of the Act on the basis of a search and seizure operation conducted by a special team of the RPF in the shop premises of Ramesh. The offence alleged against him is that he has been supplying e-tickets to various customers, and that these e-tickets had been booked through multiple user IDs. Case Crime No. 600/2020 was registered against Ramesh, also under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act for his involvement in fraudulent activities such as supply of Tatkal e-tickets by creating multiple personal-user IDs and issuing unauthorised e-tickets procured through IRCTC website, contrary to IRCTC Rules. Ramesh, feeling aggrieved by initiation of criminal action by the respondent- authorities, approached the Madras High Court under Section 482, Cr. PC with a prayer to quash the criminal proceedings. The Madras High Court, however, refused to quash the criminal proceedings. Dissatisfied with the impugned order of the Madras High Court, Ramesh has questioned the same in the connected appeals.
SUBMISSIONS
7. For the sake of brevity, the submissions advanced by the parties in both sets of the appeals ar
