The Public Prosecutor v. Jevan And Others

(Prayer: Appeals (disposed of on 29-4-1941) under S. 417 Crl. P.C., 1898, against the acquittal of the aforesaid respondents (accused) by the Sub-Magistrate of Mettupalayam in C.C. Nos. 703, 808, 810, 812, 814, 816, 823, 825, 828, 839, and 840 of 1940 respectively.)

These are appeals by the Provincial Government against the orders of acquittal of the respondents of an offence under S. 123(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

The respondents are drivers of transport vehicles and they were prosecuted under S. 123(1) of Motor Vehicles Act for driving the vehicles on the public road without a permit authorising the use of the vehicles in a public place. They pleaded that it was the duty of the owner to obtain the permit and accepting their plea the Sub-Magistrate acquitted them.

The alleged driving of the transport vehicles on the public road without a permit authorising the use of the vehicles in a public place was not denied by the respondents, and so far as is material, S. 42(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act provides that no owner of a transport vehicle shall use or permit the use of the vehicle in any public place save in accordance with the conditions of a permit authorising the use of the vehicle in that place. The driving of a transport vehicle on the public road without such a permit would certainly contravene S. 42(1) of the Act, and S. 123(1) enacts that whoever drives a motor vehicle in contravention of the provisions of sub-S. (1) of S. 42 shall be punishable with fine. That the permit is to be obtained by the owner cannot make any difference and whoever drives the vehicle in a public place without a permit authorising the use of the vehicle in that place would be punishable under S. 123(1) of the Act. The orders of acquittal are therefore set aside and the respondents are convicted under S. 123(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act. They are sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 5 each and in default to simple imprisonment for one week.