SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(Kar) 679

Karnataka High Court
S.CHANDRAPRAKASH - Appellant
Versus
REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, BANGALORE CENTRAL - Respondent
Decided On : 12-09-04
W.P. : 44780 of 2004

Advocates:
B.PALAKSHIAH, P.S.RAJGOPAL

Headnote:Powers of Regional Transport Officer

       MOTOR VEHICLE ACT, 1988 - Section 192-A -Powers of RTO -RTO has no power to impose fine for an offence under Section 192-A -It is for the competent court to impose fine after prosecution in accordance with law.

       [Mohan Shantanagoudar, J]: The Court has jurisdiction to impose fine and consequently the Regional Transport Officer has no jurisdiction to impose fine. Before imposing fine for the offence under Section 192-A, the erring permit holder has to be prosecuted in accordance with law in the Court of law and only after finding him guilty, the Court may impose fine. Against such conviction and imposition of fine, the appeal lies to the Appellate Court as is clear from sub-section (3) of Section 192-A of the "Act".

MOHAN SHANTHANAGOUDAR, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner has sought for a writ of certiorari to quash the endorsement dated 29-10-2004 issued by the respondent at Annexure-C. By issuing the said endorsement, the Regional Transport Officer, bangalore (Central) has imposed fine of Rs. 2,000/- on the petitioner under Section 192-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('act' for short) for violating the condition of permit issued by the respondent.

( 2 ) ON careful perusal of Section 192-A of the Act it is clear that the court has jurisdiction to impose fine and consequently the Regional transport Officer has no jurisdiction to impose fine. Before imposing fine for the offence under Section 192-A, the erring permit holder has to be prosecuted in accordance with law in the Court of law and only after finding him guilty, the Court may impose fine. Against such conviction and imposition of fine, the appeal lies to the Appellate Court as is clear from sub-section (3) of Section 192-A of the "act". In view of the above, the impugned endorsement dated 29-10-2004 cannot be sustained and the same is liable to be quashed. Hence, the following order is made. The endorsement dated 29-10-2004 bearing No. RTO. BNG. C/dsa (TR) KA-01/d-2658/04, issued by the respondent vide Annexure-A is quashed. However, it is made clear that it is open for the respondent to initiate prosecution against the petitioner in accordance with law. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

--- *** ---

.



Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top