Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
BIBEK CHAUDHURI, J.
Puja Travels Hotel Paradise Basement, Near Patna Junction Through Its Proprietor Manoj Kumar(Male) – Appellant
Versus
The Union Of India – Respondent
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.368 of 2023
Decided on : 06-03-2024
RAILWAY PROTECTION - RAIDS BY RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE - Indian Railways Act, 1989 - Section 143; Railway Protection Force Act, 1957 - Section 3 - The court interpreted Section 143 of the Indian Railways Act, which penalizes unauthorized ticket procurement and supply, emphasizing that it does not apply to authorized agents like the petitioners. The court also analyzed the jurisdiction of the Railway Protection Force (RPF) under the Railway Protection Force Act, concluding that the RPF's raids outside the defined 'passenger area' were illegal. The decision highlighted the need for adherence to statutory provisions and the proper channels for addressing grievances against authorized agents.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, authorized travel agents for IRCTC, challenged the legality of raids conducted by the Railway Protection Force (RPF) outside their jurisdiction, alleging violations of their rights under the Indian Constitution and the Indian Railways Act. They contended that the RPF conducted illegal raids without proper jurisdiction and without following due process, leading to wrongful arrests and prosecutions under Section 143 of the Indian Railways Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the RPF acted beyond its jurisdiction by conducting raids in the offices of the petitioners, which were not located within the defined 'passenger area.' The court ruled that the actions of the RPF were illegal and void ab initio, as they did not comply with the statutory provisions governing their authority.
Issues: The primary issues were whether the RPF had the jurisdiction to conduct raids outside the passenger area and whether the petitioners could be prosecuted under Section 143 of the Indian Railways Act given their status as authorized agents.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that Section 143 of the Indian Railways Act does not apply to authorized agents like the petitioners, as they are not unauthorized persons. Furthermore, the definition of 'passenger area' does not extend to the offices of the travel agents, thus invalidating the RPF's actions.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioners under Section 143 of the Indian Railways Act. The court also granted the petitioners the liberty to take action against the RPF officers for unlawful arrest.
[Your Name]
[Your Address]
[City, State, ZIP Code]
[Email Address]
[Phone Number]
[Date]
To,
The Hon’ble Court
[Name of the Court]
[Address of the Court]
Subject: Application for Acquittal in Case of Criminal Proceedings under Section 143 of the Indian Railways Act
Respected Sir/Madam,
I, [Your Name], the accused in the matter pertaining to the criminal proceedings initiated against me under Section 143 of the Indian Railways Act, hereby submit this application for acquittal on the grounds detailed below, which are supported by relevant legal principles and judicial pronouncements.
Lack of Jurisdiction of the Railway Protection Force (RPF):
The proceedings against me are based on raids conducted by the RPF outside the defined passenger area, which includes only the railway platform, train, yard, and such other areas frequently visited by passengers. The offices of the petitioner are situated outside these areas and do not fall within the jurisdiction of the RPF. The raids conducted in these offices are therefore illegal and beyond the statutory powers conferred upon the RPF (!) (!) (!) .
Inapplicability of Section 143 of the Indian Railways Act:
Section 143 of the Indian Railways Act is a penal provision that applies solely to unauthorized persons carrying on the business of procuring and supplying railway tickets. As the accused, I am an authorized agent of IRCTC and operate under the terms and conditions of the IRCTC agreement, which explicitly delineate penalties for misconduct. The provisions of the IRCTC agreement and the terms and conditions clearly specify that any irregular activity should be reported to IRCTC for appropriate action, and the RPF's role is to forward such allegations, not to conduct raids or initiate prosecutions (!) (!) .
Violation of Legal Procedures and Constitutional Rights:
The arrest and subsequent proceedings violate the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court regarding the procedure for arrest, including mandatory safeguards under the Criminal Procedure Code. No specific complaint from passengers or evidence of illegal activity within the passenger area has been established against me. The raids were conducted without proper jurisdiction, without following due process, and in violation of my fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution (!) (!) (!) .
Illegality of the Proceedings and Seizure:
The search, seizure, and prosecution initiated under Section 143 are illegal as they are based on raids outside the passenger area, which is not authorized by law. The entire activity of the RPF in this context is held to be illegal and void ab initio, rendering the proceedings against me invalid (!) (!) .
In light of the above, I respectfully request this Hon’ble Court to:
Thanking you,
Yours sincerely,
[Your Name]
[Signature]
JUDGMENT :
BIBEK CHAUDHURI, J.
The petitioners are proprietorship travel agents.
Petitioners No. 1, 2, and 3 are primarily authorized rail e-ticket agents of IRCTC. The rest travel agencies are further authorized by the petitioner no. 01, 02, and 03 travel agents as their Retail Service Proprietor (RSP) to book the railway e-tickets and manual tickets. Thus, all the petitioners are performing their duties as Principle Service Provider (PSP) or Retail Service Provider for sale and advance booking of Railway e-tickets. They have their centers for e-ticketing at their respective offices outside the premises of Patna Railway Station and Rajendra Nagar Railway Station.
2. The petitioners have jointly filed the instant writ petition praying for the issuance of appropriate raids thereby, prohibiting the Railway Protection Force (RPF) deployed in Patna Junction, Danapur Junction, and Rajendra Nagar Terminal from conducting illegal raids outside their jurisdictional limits, search, and seizures without obtaining consent and giving pre-raid information to the local police station within whose jurisdiction the offices of respective travel agents were situated. The petitioners. The petitioners have also prayed for a declaration that initiation of proceeding under Section 143 of the Indian Railways Act, 1989, against the petitioners' consequent arrest of the travel agents production of the arrested persons before the Railway Magistrate, Patna, and remanding them to judicial custody are bad in law, and violating Article 14,19 and 21 of the Constitution of India as well as the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273.
3. They have also prayed for consequential reliefs.
4. The case of the petitioners is that the petitioners as travel agents have been working as Retail Service Providers by booking authorized railway e-tickets in which public money is spent and there is no public interest involved with regard to their act of selling railway e-tickets. Petitioners No. 1,2, and 3 are the Primary Service Providers under IRCTC. The rest petitioners are the Retail Service Providers to book railway e-tickets and manual tickets for a certain period of time as per the agreement with the IRCTC.
5. Thus, petitioner no. 01, Puja Travels has been authorized to book railway e-tickets, using the passcode of M/s Jayaswal Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Petitioner no. 4 is authorized to book Railway e-tickets as per Railways e-ticketing terms and conditions using the passcode of M/s Birdres Technologies Pvt. Ltd franchise system terminal connected to IRCTC system. Petitioner no. 5 is a Retail Service Provider under Principle Service Provider under Spice Money Ltd. To book Railway e-tickets. Similarly, petitioner no. 06 and petitioner no. 7 are the RSPs under PSP M/s Jayaswal Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. To book Railway e-tickets. Petitioner no. 8, is a retailer of M/s Birdres Technology Pvt. Ltd., which is one of the principal service providers under IRCTC. Further, the case of the petitioners is that the petitioners being the travel agents book tickets as per demands of the customers from their respective offices, situated within the jurisdiction of different police stations in the city of Patna, Danapur, and Rajendra Nagar. None of the offices of the petitioners are situated within the platform or passenger area of any of the aforesaid railway stations. However, the grievance of the petitioners is that members of the Railway Protection Force (RPF) in utter violation of their jurisdiction as described in the Railway Protection Force Act, habitually conduct illegal raids in the offices of the said travel agents. The petitioners contend that such raids were periodically conducted by the RPF for illegal gratification in the name of monthly wasooli. According to the petitioners, they do not have any jurisdiction to conduct any raid outside the passengers area. It is alleged by the petitioners that on different dates, the membe
Authorized agents of IRCTC cannot be prosecuted under Section 143 of the Indian Railways Act for actions taken within the scope of their authorization, and the jurisdiction of the Railway Protection ....
The unauthorized sale of e-tickets through online platforms is prohibited under Section 143 of the Railways Act, covering both physical and online ticket sales.
(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 unauthori....
Unauthorized procurement or supply of railway tickets under Section 143 requires clear evidence of such actions, which was absent in this case.
Seizure of unauthorized Railway tickets – Order taking cognizance must reflect application of judicial mind by Magistrate.
Members of the Railway Protection Force cannot claim immunity under the Railway Protection Force Act and Cr.P.C. if the alleged misconduct is unconnected to their official duties and results in grave....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
