Telangana HC bars police from using ‘coercive measures’ to collect on-the-spot traffic fines

The order added that pending traffic challan amounts may be collected if the traffic offenders are willing to pay. “If the challans remain unpaid, the traffic offenders shall face the prosecution in the appropriate court,” the order clarified, also adding that the respondents may take appropriate action strictly in accordance with law.

The court was hearing two writ petitions filed by V Raghavendra Chary, which alleged that police officers were stopping vehicles and using high-pressure tactics to collect unpaid fines. Advocate Vijay Gopal, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that under Section 200 of the Motor Vehicles Act of 1988, the state must publish a notification in the official gazette to specify the officers and amounts for “compounding” (settling) offences.

He submitted that a government order (GO Ms 108) was issued in August 2011 for compounding of offences under Section 200 of the MV Act, and contended that the required official notification was never published, leaving the police without the legal authority to compound these offences. Instead of following the legal route of prosecution in court, the police were allegedly “forcing” citizens to pay on the roadside, he argued.

The counsel urged the court to stay the government order issued by the transport, roads and buildings department, which is the basis for the Telangana Police (traffic or law and order) to force citizens to pay pending traffic challans. He contended that under Section 200 read with 208 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the respondents have no authority to compound offences.

The court noted that the said government order has not been placed before the court. On their part, the assistant government pleader for home submitted that a detailed counter would be filed.

While issuing the directions, the court made it clear that the order is confined to the action of the respondent authorities while initiating action against traffic violations. It further clarified that this order does not preclude the respondent authorities from initiating appropriate proceedings while checking the commuters in the usual course.

The matter was then posted for a further hearing on February 3, by which time the state is expected to file a detailed counter-affidavit.