The Bombay High Court on Wednesday asked the state to explain the process of law being followed in dealing with cases of drunken driving. The court was hearing a petition filed by Wadala resident Nikhil Kisnani,challenging his prosecution for drunken driving saying that the authorities did not follow prescribed procedure in his case. Justice S C Dharmadhikari on Wednesday directed the state to file a detailed affidavit within two weeks explaining in detail the authority and jurisdiction of the courts dealing with matters of drunken driving. Petitioners counsel Shirish Gupte argued that that Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act deals with driving under the influence of alcohol,which is a cognizable offence and hence the traffic police were required to follow procedure prescribed under the Criminal Procedure Code. Gupte argued,In such cases the first offence is punishable with six months imprisonment and the second offence with two years. Here people who are executing such sentences are not competent to do so. The court then asked additional public prosecutor Alpa Javeri if proper procedure was not being followed. Javeri argued that in these cases it was impossible to do everything on the spot. She pointed out that the facts of each case are different like rash and negligent driving and drunken driving. Javeri also added that these courts who were hearing the matter were empowered by notifications to that effect. The court,however,said that having a notification was not enough; the notification must also be traceable to law. The state has now been directed to file a reply stating what is the jurisdiction and authority of these courts to prosecute people under drunken driving within two weeks.
