Pramod Kumar Pandey vs Assistant Regional Transport Officer (A) and Others

M. Katju, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner.

It appears that the Petitioner''s vehicle has been seized u/s 207(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act. The remedy in such a case is to apply u/s 207(2) of the said Act. However, learned Counsel for the Petitioner invited my attention to a Division Bench decision of this Court in Phool Chandra v. A.R.T.C. and Ors. decided on 24.9.1996 being Writ Petition No. 30970 of 1996, copy of which is Annexure 6 to the writ petition. In this decision, it has been held that the Petitioner has an alternative remedy of either approaching the authority concerned u/s 207(2) of the said Act or to approach the Magistrate concerned u/s 457, Code of Criminal Procedure In my humble opinion, the above decision requires to be reconsidered since, in my opinion, the only alternative remedy where the vehicle is seized u/s 207(1) is to apply u/s 207(2) of the Act. In my opinion, there is no remedy to apply u/s 457, Code of Criminal Procedure This is so because the special law overrides the general law. The Motor Vehicles Act is a special law relating to Motor Vehicles and it will override the general law in the Code of Criminal Procedure Moreover, the seizure in the present case is u/s 207(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act and not under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Hence, in my opinion, the Motor Vehicles Act will apply and not the Code of Criminal Procedure In my respectful opinion, the view of the Division Bench that the Petitioner can either approach the Transport Authority u/s 207(2) of the Act or the Magistrate concerned u/s 457, Code of Criminal Procedure does not appear to be correct, and requires reconsideration. In my opinion, the only remedy is u/s 207(2) of the Act and not u/s 457, Code of Criminal Procedure.

Let the papers of this case be laid before Hon''ble the Chief Justice for constituting a larger Bench for reconsidering the view of the Division Bench in the aforesaid Writ Petition No. 30970 of 1996.

In the meanwhile I direct that if the Petitioner files an application u/s 207(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act before the authority mentioned in that provision, the said application will be decided within three weeks of filing of the said application along with a certified copy of this order.