Traffic challan – Company vehicle – presence of MD / CEO in Court is not required
In this case, the vehicle was registered in the name of the petitioner – company. It was given traffic challan for over speeding.
On 19.7.2024, the authorized representative (AR) appeared before the Court. However, the Court found the stamp of the company in possession of AR was similar to the stamp affixed on the authority letter of MD / CEO. The Court directed for appearance of Notary and MD / CEO.
After making inquiry on 27.7.2024, the Court found that the entries in the Notar Register were not properly maintained and after giving warning to the Notar he was discharged to be careful in future. However, it was directed that without physical presence of CEO / MD, fine cannot be imposed.
Both the orders were challenged in the High Court.
Salutary observations –
- The company may be in possession of several vehicles for its business and it may be feasible for CEO / MD to appear for traffic challans. When AR is duly authorized the insistence of CEO is not required.
- alternative redressal mechanism by appointment of a nominated officer / official in the concerned zone of Delhi Traffic Police.
- suitable modifications in the website of e-Court / Virtual Court for disposal of traffic challans – option to the offender if the user of the vehicle at the relevant time was the registered owner or was driven by another person / driver is foreclosed if registered owner does not receive challan and challan is forwarded to e-court.
- the website of e-Court / Virtual court may reflect option that the offence can be compounded so that large number of challans may be compounded in the Virtual Court itself without going to the Lok Adalats for disposal.
Order dated 21.10.2024 of the High Court of Delhi in CRL.M.C.6071/2024 of Benetton India Private Limited Vs. State NCT of Delhi with connected matter
