Cops Cannot Use Coercive Steps for Pending Challans: Telangana HC

The judge clarified that in the event of non-payment of traffic fines, the authorities must strictly follow the due process of law, including issuing notice and initiating prosecution before a competent court. The High Court categorically held that coercive steps such as snatching of vehicle keys or forcing payment of fines were impermissible in law.

The court clarified that the order was confined to recovery of already issued or pending challans and did not restrict routine vehicle checks or lawful action taken during such checks in accordance with statutory provisions. The judge said that if the challans remained unpaid, the traffic offenders shall face the prosecution in the appropriate court.

The court issued these directions in two writ petitions filed by V. Raghavendra Chary and others challenging the procedure adopted by the Telangana police and the Hyderabad traffic police in the recovery of pending traffic challans.

Vijay Gopal, counsel for the petitioners, argued that the traffic police were acting without statutory authority by stopping vehicles on roads and compelling motorists to pay accumulated challans without following the procedure prescribed under the Motor Vehicles (MV) Act, 1988. He contended that recovery of fines without initiating prosecution or issuing court notices amounted to coercive action and violated the rights of citizens.

Counsel relied on Section 200 of the MV Act, which provides for compounding of certain offences either before or after institution of prosecution, subject to amounts notified by the state government through a gazette notification. Reference was made to GO No. 108 dated 18.08.2011, issued by the transport, roads and buildings department, prescribing compounding fees for traffic offences.

It was pointed out that although the GO contemplated publication of a notification, no such notification had been issued to date. In the absence of a notification, the petitioner argued, the police lacked the authority to compound offences and should proceed only by way of prosecution before an appropriate court.

The assistant government pleader for home sought time to file a detailed counter affidavit addressing the issues raised. Accepting the prima facie submissions by the petitioner, the High Court restrained the police from adopting any forceful measures for recovery of pending challans and reiterated that enforcement agencies are bound to act only in accordance with the procedure established by law.

Justice Shravan Kumar stated: “Traffic police officials are at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings for prosecution of traffic offenders before the competent court. In the event the traffic offenders are willing to pay the pending challans, the same may be collected.”

The matter was posted to February for further hearing, with the state directed to place its response on record.