( 1 ) THE petitioner in both the oases is one Rayala Ramarao, who was prosecuted under the provisions to be noticed below of the Motor Vehicles Act. There were originally three prosecutions against him and the cases are numbered as C. C. Nos. 903, 004 and 905 of 1958 on the file of the 1st Addl. Judicial IInd Class Magistrate, Elluru. C. C. No. 903 of 1958 ended in an acquittal and it does not require consideration.

( 2 ) IN C. C. No. 904 of 1958, the prosecution was laid under Section 38 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act (Act IV of 1939), the ground of complaint being that the vehicle did not have fitness certificate as retired by the section. The relevant Section 38 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act reacts as follows:"subject to the provisions of Section 38, a transport vehicle shall not be deemed to be validly registered for the purposes of Section 22, unless it carries a certificate of fitness in Form H as set forth in the First Schedule issued by the prescribed authority, to the effect that the vehicle complies for the time being with all the requirements of Ch. V and the rules made thereunder. Where the prescribed authority refuses to issue such certificate, it Shall s