2023 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 99900
MADRAS HIGH COURT
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J
S.Anandakumar – Appellant
Versus
The Regional Transport officer – Respondent
WP/780/2023
The police only have the authority to seize a driving license in three specific circumstances: (1) if the license is false; (2) if the driver is trying to avoid service of summons; or (3) if the police have reason to believe that the driver has committed an offense under certain specified sections of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Headnote:
DRIVING LICENSE - SEIZURE - POWER OF POLICE - [MOTOR VEHICLES (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2019, SECTIONS 19, 206] - Police has power to seize the license only in the three contingencies mentioned in Sec. 206 of the Act. In such view of the matter, even to seize the license U/s. 206 proper reasons has to be recorded. In such view of the matter, without any reasons being recorded the license cannot be seized.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a driver for the State Express Transport Corporation, had his driving license seized by the police after an accident. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking the return of his license.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the police did not have the authority to seize the petitioner's license because they did not have a reasonable belief that he had committed an offense under any of the sections specified in Section 206 of the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019.
Issues: Whether the police had the authority to seize the petitioner's driving license.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the police only have the authority to seize a driving license in three specific circumstances: (1) if the license is false; (2) if the driver is trying to avoid service of summons; or (3) if the police have reason to believe that the driver has committed an offense under certain specified sections of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and directed the police to return the petitioner's driving license.
W.P.No.780 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11.01.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR
W.P.No.780 of 2023
&
W.M.P.No.727 of 2023
S.Anandakumar
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Regional Transport Officer
and Licensing Authority
Villupuram
2.The Inspector of Police
Villupuram West Police Station
Villupuram
... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith
return petitioner's original driving license bearing DL
No.TN20Y20080002498 to the petitioner within a time limit that may be
fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner
: Mr.K.Hariharan
For Respondents
: Mrs.R.Anitha, Spl.G.P
________
Page 1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.780 of 2023
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents to
forthwith return petitioner's original driving license bearing DL
No.TN20Y20080002498 to the petitioner.
2. The case of the Writ Petitioner is that he is the driver of the State
Express Transport Corporation. While driving the vehicle on 06.12.2022,
the vehicle met with an accident while proceeding to Villupuram bus stand
and the FIR has been filed and the driving license has been collected by the
respondent Poilice. The FIR has been filed for offences U/s. 279 and 304 A
IPC. Therefore, he seeks a direction for release of the license.
3. Heard the learned counsel on either side.
4. This Court in W.P.No.11 of 2023, in a similar situation has dealt
elaborately the manner in which the powers could be exercised U/s. 19 of
the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019(in short 'Act') and powers of
the Police officer U/s.206 (4) of the Act. Though this Court has held that
power U/s. 19(!) of the Act could be initiated irrespective of the criminal
________
Page 2 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.780 of 2023
cases conclusion, such power has to be exercised only after giving an
proper opportunity to the petitioner and is also held that seizure of the
license is not required for taking action U/s. 19. The action U/s. 19 could
be initiated on the basis of the report submitted by the Police officer.
Similarly, the power of the Police officer to seize the license pursuant to the
in cession of the Sec.206(4) of the Act is elaborately dealt.
5. This Court has held that Police have power to seize the license
only in the three contingencies mentioned in Sec. 206 of the Act. In such
view of the matter, even to seize the license U/s. 206 proper reasons has to
be recorded. In such view of the matter, without any reasons being recorded
the license cannot be seized. In the given case, the license has been seized
merely based on the FIR u/s. 297 and 304(A).
6. This Court in W.P.No.11 of 2023 has held as follows:
14. Therefore, before any action taken under
Section 19 of the Act, an opportunity has to be
given by the Licensing Authority. Therefore, the
seizure power of the police introduced under
Section 206 of the Act is only in certain
circumstances. Only if the police officer has reason
________
Page 3 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.780 of 2023
to believe that offence has committed in any of the
sections 183, 184, 185, 189, 190, 194C, 194D, or
194E under sub-clause (4) of Section 206 of the M.V.
Act, he can seize the licence and forward to the
Licensing Authority. The combined reading of
Clauses 1, 2, 3, and 4 of Section 206 of M.V.Act
makes it clear that only three contingencies, the
police officer can seize the licence. Particularly,
when the identification mark or licence or the
documents relating to the vehicle are false those
documents can be seized under sub-clause (1).
15. The second contingency on which police
officer can seize the licence is if any person
charged under the M.V. Act, try to abscond or avoid
service of summons, licen