Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 90611
MADRAS HIGH COURT
A.S.Sakthiman – Appellant
Versus
Inspector – Respondent
WP/34767/2022
Mere registration of an FIR is not a ground to impound the original driving license or to make any endorsement therein or suspend the same, if it does not satisfy the requirements of Section 19 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Headnote:
DRIVING LICENSE - IMPOUNDMENT - [Section 19(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988] - Mere registration of FIR is not a ground to impound the original license or to make any endorsement therein or suspend the same, if it does not satisfy the requirements of Section 19 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a driver working in the Metropolitan Transport Corporation, Chennai, was involved in an accident while driving a bus. A complaint was filed, and the petitioner's driving license was seized and handed over to the police. The petitioner made a representation to the Licensing Authority to return the original driving license, but no action was taken.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the mere registration of an FIR is not a ground to impound the original license or to make any endorsement therein or suspend the same, if it does not satisfy the requirements of Section 19 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Issues: Whether the police can impound the original driving license of a person involved in an accident without following the procedure laid down in Section 19 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the judgment of the Division Bench in P. Sethuraman Vs. The Licensing Authority, The Regional Transport Officer, Dindigul, reported in 2010 Writ Law Reporter 100, which held that mere registration of an FIR will not be a ground to impound the original license or to make any endorsement therein or suspend the same, if it does not satisfy the requirements of Section 19 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Final Decision: The court directed the Licensing Authority to return the driving license of the petitioner forthwith.
W.P.No.34767 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 02.01.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR
W.P.No.34767 of 2022
A.S.Sakthiman
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police
TIW R-4, Pondy Bazar Police Station
Chennai-17
2.The Licensing Authority cum
Regional Transport Officer
Chennai South West
Chennai-92
... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent herein to
return the original driving license (DL No.TN04 19830001318) to the
petitioner forthwith.
For Petitioner
: Mr.K.Hariharan
For Respondents : Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan, AGP
O R D E R
Writ petition is filed seeking to issue a Writ of mandamus directing
the 2nd respondent herein to return the original driving license (DL
________
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.34767 of 2022
No.TN04 19830001318) to the petitioner forthwith.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he is a Driver, working in the
Metropolitan Transport Corporation, Chennai. On 13/11/2022, while he
was driving the bus, bearing Registration No.TN-01-AN-2583, involved in
an accident with a two wheeler bearing vehicle No.TN-10-BK-9776 and he
died on the spot. A complaint was given and the same was registered in
Crime No.261 of 2022, for the offences punishable under Sections 279 and
304 A of the Indian Penal Code. During the course of investigation, the
driving license of the petitioner was seized and it was handed over to the
first respondent. Hence the petitioner had made a representation, dated
23/11/2022 to the second respondent to return the original driving license.
Since the same was not acted upon, present writ petition has been filed.
3. Heard Mr.K. Hariharan, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan, learned Additional Government Pleader for the
respondents.
4. The issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the
________
Page 2 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.34767 of 2022
judgment of the Division Bench in P.SETHURAMAN Vs. THE
LICENSING AUTHORITY, THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
DINDIGUL, reported in 2010 Writ Law Reporter 100. The Division Bench
judgment has been subsequently followed by this Court in various orders.
In W.P.No.18144 of 2021 (K.ARUMUGAM Vs. THE LICENSING
AUTHORITY/REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, OFFICE OF
THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, TAMBARAM,
CHENNAI,) dated 6/8/2021, this Court had relied upon the judgment of
the Division Bench and held that mere Registration of First Information
Report, will not be a ground to impound the original licence or to make
any endorsement therein or suspend the same, if it does not satisfy the
requirements of Section 19 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The said
judgment will squarely apply to the facts of the present case.
5. No such order is passed under Section 19(1) of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988. the second respondent is directed to return the driving
licence of the petitioner forthwith. It is well open them to exercise the
power provided under Section 19 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
and pass detailed order thereafter.
________
Page 3 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.34767 of 2022
6. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No
costs.
02.01.2023
kpr
Internet:Yes
Index:Yes/No
Neutral citation:Yes/No
To
1.The Inspector of Police
TIW R-4, Pondy Bazar Police Station
Chennai-17
2.The Licensing Authority cum
Regional Transport Officer
Chennai South West
Chennai-92
________
Page 4 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.34767 of 2022
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
kpr
W.P.No.34767 of 2022
02.01.2023
________
Page 5 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
