Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether State notifications issued under Section 200 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 could lawfully permit continuation of overloading after compounding of the offence under Section 194 of the Act.
Analysis: Section 200 authorises compounding of specified offences on payment of the amount fixed by the State Government, but it does not authorise the State to legalise the continued carriage of excess load after compounding. Sections 113 and 114 regulate permissible weight and empower off-loading of excess weight, while Section 194 penalises driving or allowing a vehicle to be driven in contravention of those provisions and expressly contemplates liability for off-loading charges. The compounding power is therefore limited to compromise of the offence itself and cannot be used to neutralise or suspend the statutory mandate against overloading. A notification that allows the excess load to remain in the vehicle after compounding runs contrary to the Act and is invalid.
Conclusion: The notifications could not validly permit continuation of the overloading after compounding and were not sustainable to that extent.
Ratio Decidendi: The power to compound offences under Section 200 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is confined to settlement of the specified offence and does not extend to authorising continuation of conduct that remains in breach of the weight restrictions imposed by Sections 113 and 114.