Chinnappa Reddy, J. - (1.) The Andhra Pradesh High Court has declared Section 129-A of the Motor Vehicles Act unconstitutional and void as offending Art, 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India. We may straightway say that the judgment of the High Court suffers from serious infirmities, not the least of which is the total failure to notice and consider the applicability of the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the situation.
(2.) On an oral application by the Advocate General, the High Court granted leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. Presumably, by 'leave' the High Court meant a certificate as provided under the Constitution. The order of the High Court regarding the grant of 'leave' to appeal to this Court is in the following terms: "An oral application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court has been made by the learned Advocate General. The question whether S. 129-A of the Motor Vehicles Act is ultra vires the Constitution on the ground that it infringes Art. 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution relates to the interpretation of the Constitution and is also a substantial question of law of general importance, which requires to be decided by the Supreme Court. Therefore, we grant leave to appeal to the Supreme Court". The order of the High Court states, (i) that the question relates to the interpretation of the Constitution; and (ii) the question is also a substantial question of law of general importance which requires to be decided by the Supreme Court. The order of the High Court while saying that the question relates to the interpretation of the Constitution refrained from certifying that the case involved a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution. We cannot therefore, treat the certificate as one under Art. 132 of the Constitution. On the other hand the High Court has certified that the case involves a substantial question of law of general importance and it requires to be decided by the Supreme Court, employing the precise language used in clauses (a) and (b) respectively of Art. 133 (1) of the Constitution. The certificate, therefore, was clearly one under Art. 133 of the Constitution. We are mentioning these circumstances because at the very commencement, our attention was invited to Art. 145 (3) of the Constitution which provides that the minimum number of Judges who are to sit for the purpose of deciding any case involving a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution or for the purpose of hearing any reference under Art. 143 shall be five. The High Court had not certified that the cases involved a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution and we are also satisfied that the cases do not involve a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution. We proceeded to hear the appeals and writ petitions after the position was clarified when the cases were opened by the learned counsel.
(3.) Section 129A of the Motor Vehicles Act may be extracted here. It is as follows:- "129-A. Power to detain vehicles used without certificate of registration or permit.- Any police officer authorised in this behalf or other person authorised in this behalf by the State Government may, if he has reason to believe that a motor vehicle has been or is being used in contravention of the provisions of Section 22 or without the permit required by sub-section (2) of Section 42 or in contravention of any condition of such permit relating to the route on which or the area in which or the purpose for which the vehicle may be used, seize and detain the vehicle, and for this purpose take or cause to be taken any steps he may consider proper for the temporary safe custody of the vehicle. Provided that where any such officer or person has reason to believe that a motor vehicle has been or is being used without the permit required by sub-section (1) of Section 42, he may, instead of seizing the vehicle, seize the certificate of registration of the vehicle and shall issue an acknowledgment in respect thereof. Provided further that where a motor vehicle has been seized and detained under this section for contravention of the provisions of Section 22, such vehicle shall not be released to the owner unless and until he produces a valid-certificate of registration under this Act in respect of that vehicle." It is seen that Section 129-A contemplates three situations where the police officer or authorised person may seize and detain the vehicle. The three situations are, (1) where he has reason to believe that the motor vehicle has been or is being used in contravention of the provisions of Section 22, (ii) where he has reason to believe that the motor vehicle has been or is being used without the permit required by Section 42(1), and (iii) where he has reason to believe that the motor vehicle has been or is being used in contravention of any condition of such permit relating to the route on which or the area in which or the purpose for which the vehicle may be used. These are precisely the three situations contemplated by Section 123 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act and made punishable under that provision. Section 123 (1), which may also be extracted, is as follows:- "Section 123, Using vehicle without registration or permit. - (1) Whoever drives a motor vehicle or causes or allows a motor vehicle to be used in contravention of the provisions of Section 22 or without the permit required by sub-section (1) of Section 42 or in contravention of any condition of such permit relating to the route on which or the area in which or the purpose for which the vehicle may be used or to the maximum number of passengers and maximum weight of luggage that may be carried on the vehicle shall be punishable for a first offence with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees and for any second or subsequent offence with imprisonment which may extend to six months or with the which may extend to three thousand rupees, or with both: Provided that no Court shall, except for reasons to be stated in writing, impose a fine of less than five hundred rupees for any such second or subsequent offence." It is therefore, clear that the power given to seize and detain the vehicle under Section 129-(A) is to be exercised by the police officer or the authorised person when he has reason to believe that an offence punishable under Section 123 (1) has been or is being committed. Now, after detecting the commission of an offence punishable under Section 123 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, the next appropriate step for the police officer or the authorised person would be to consider the question whether the offence should be compounded as provided by Section 127-B of the Motor Vehicles Act and any notification issued by the Government in that behalf. Section 127-B may also be extracted here and it is as follows: "127-B. (1) Any offence (whether committed before or after the commencement of Section 26 of the Motor Vehicles (Amendment Act, 1982) punishable under Section 112, Section 113, Section 113A, Section 113B, Section 114, sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 115, Section 116, Section 118, Section 120, Section 122, Section 123, Section 124, Section 125 or Section 127 may, either before or after the institution of the prosecution, be compounded by such officers or authorities and for such amount as the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazettee, specify in this behalf. (2) Where an offence has been compounded under sub-section (1), the offender, if in custody, shall be discharged and no further proceedings shall be taken against him in respect of such offence." Thereafter the next logical and appropriate step for the police officer or the authorised person would be to lay a complaint before the Court competent to take cognizance of the offence, subject to the overriding provision of Section 132 of the Motor Vehicles Act which provides that no Court inferior to that of a Metropolitan Magistrate or a Magistrate of the second class shall try any offence punishable under the Motor Vehicles Act or any rule made thereunder. Section 4(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that all offences under any law other than the Penal Code shall also be investigated, inquired into, tried, and otherwise dealt with according to the same provisions, that is, the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, subject to any enactment for the time being in force regulating the manner or place of investigating, inquiring into, trying or otherwise dealing with such offences. Chapter XIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure deals with "Jurisdiction of the Criminal Courts in inquiries and trials". So, subject to Section 132 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the Court before which the complaint may be laid has to be determined in accordance with the provisions of Chapter XIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure. After the complaint is laid the case has to be tried in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This again is subject to one special provision of the Motor Vehicles Act, namely Section 130. Section 130 is in the following terms:- "The court taking cognizance of an offence under this Act,- (1) may, if the offence is an offence punishable with imprisonment under this Act, and (ii) shall, in any other case, state upon the summons to be served on the accused person that he - (a) may appear by pleader and not in person, or (b) may by a specified date prior to the hearing of the charge plead guilty to the charge by registered letter and remit to the court such sum (not exceeding the maximum fine that may be imposed for the offence) as the court may specify: Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to any offence specified in Part A of the Fifth Schedule. Where the offence dealt with in accordance with sub-section (1) is an offence specified in Part B of the Fifth Schedule, the accused person shall, if he pleads guilty to the charge, forward his licence to the Court with the letter containing his plea in order that the conviction may be endorsed on the licence. Where an accused person pleads guilty and remits the sum specified and has complied with the provisions of sub-section (2), no further proceedings in respect of the offence shall be taken against him, nor shall he be liable to be disqualified for holding or obtaining a licence by reason of his having pleaded guilty." That is how the offender is dealt with.;